Can cars with 14" wheels now use 13" wheels?
- Thread starter Jake
- Start date
Andy Bettencourt
Super Moderator
I usually don't operate in teh 'grey', but here it goes...
In this rule, cars originally equipped with metric 365 wheels may ONLY fit fourteen (14) inch wheels. They should be able to go to 15's...
And was pointed out to me earlier..."Cars originally equipped with wheels smaller than (15) inches may fit a larger than GCR-specified wheel up to fifteen (15) inches...: Does this leave a loophole to increase original diameter up to 15" OVER what you have?
How about this:
Cars originally equipped with wheels smaller than (15) inches may fit a larger than GCR-specified wheel up to fifteen (15) inches in total diameter.
Or just spell it out like Greg suggests above.
AB
------------------
Andy Bettencourt
New England Region, R188967
ITA project SM
www.flatout-motorsports.com
Close, but still needs fixing.
How about:
Cars originally equipped with twelve (12) inch wheels may fit twelve (12), thirteen (13), fourteen (14), or fifteen (15) inch wheels. Cars originally equipped with thirteen (13) inch or metric 365 wheels wheels may fit thirteen (13), fourteen (14) or fifteen (15) inch diameter wheels. Cars originally equipped with fourteen (14) inch or metric 390 wheels may fit fourteen (14), fifteen (15) inch diameter wheels. All other cars shall retain the wheel diameter fitted as original equipment for their make, model, and type as listed on the spec line.
The change is Greg forgot that you could still use the original size. And don't tell me that's a given considering the lawyering going on with the 05 rule as currently written.
------------------
George Roffe
Houston, TX
84 944 ITS car under construction
92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
http://www.nissport.com
Racerlinn
New member
Originally posted by Andy Bettencourt:
Greg,
Oh ya, for you...look at the 1st and 5th picture down...two ITA cars...fun, fun fun...
http://www.flatout-motorsports.com/results.php
AB
Well, at least the car in the 5th picture down is the correct color!
(Sorry, couldn't help myself, I'm still dizzy from reading Geo's haiku...)
------------------
Steve
'92 ITA Sentra SE-R
www.indyscca.org
[This message has been edited by Racerlinn (edited December 03, 2004).]
Andy,
From the Flatout Website:
"Who is that masked man? It’s a 1994 1.8 Miata being offered for sale. This one features an outstanding Chris Howard cage, a hardtop and a solid running motor. It can be completed to your specs or sold as is. Contact Bettencourt for details. And by the way, the first person to mention that they saw the car here gets a free Flatout T-shirt, so hustle!"
I SAW THE CAR THERE!!!! I SAW THE CAR THERE!!!!! (you make no mention of a requirement to purchase the car)
Please send me a shirt...Now with the shirt rule...I wear a medium, can I go UP TO a Large, OR if I hit the treadmill this winter hard, may I go DOWN TO a Small?
Kindest and warmest regards,
Alan
[This message has been edited by itbgti (edited December 03, 2004).]
From the Flatout Website:
"Who is that masked man? It’s a 1994 1.8 Miata being offered for sale. This one features an outstanding Chris Howard cage, a hardtop and a solid running motor. It can be completed to your specs or sold as is. Contact Bettencourt for details. And by the way, the first person to mention that they saw the car here gets a free Flatout T-shirt, so hustle!"
I SAW THE CAR THERE!!!! I SAW THE CAR THERE!!!!! (you make no mention of a requirement to purchase the car)
Please send me a shirt...Now with the shirt rule...I wear a medium, can I go UP TO a Large, OR if I hit the treadmill this winter hard, may I go DOWN TO a Small?
Kindest and warmest regards,
Alan
[This message has been edited by itbgti (edited December 03, 2004).]
No he didn't. Key word "may", not "must". Since these are allowances from stock, the original installed wheel size is allowed. If that wasn't true, then under the current rules the guys with 12" or metric wheels could not use their existing wheels sizes...GA
Renaultfool
New member
I have to agree with GregAmy, as long as you hog them out within 1 inch of the hub face with your ECU you should be ok. Right?
Using some of the logic I have read here and on some of the other threads lately it seems that you can do anything you want by using any interpretation of any word in or out of context. What rules.
And someone earlier in this thread had a problem of making it cheaper for someone to race. What's up with that? That should be the goal of IT in general. What can we allow everyone across the board to make it cheaper and safer.
How about restrictor plates with an iris that could be adjusted at tech before each race and sealed with a lead seal to prevent readjustment for that weekend. Use a certain formula to adjust them after the first timed practice to even out the competition for that race.
Or use the bracket racing rule from drag racing. You write your qualifing time on your window. If you run a faster lap than the qualifing time on your window you are out. Then group the cars by their stated times into race groups. That would save track time at each event by eliminating qualifing, all arguments about cheating, as only time would matter. You would have to run your best time that weekend to write on your window because if you sandbagged you would most likely "break out" in the heat of battle. This idea saved drag racing.
Using some of the logic I have read here and on some of the other threads lately it seems that you can do anything you want by using any interpretation of any word in or out of context. What rules.
And someone earlier in this thread had a problem of making it cheaper for someone to race. What's up with that? That should be the goal of IT in general. What can we allow everyone across the board to make it cheaper and safer.
How about restrictor plates with an iris that could be adjusted at tech before each race and sealed with a lead seal to prevent readjustment for that weekend. Use a certain formula to adjust them after the first timed practice to even out the competition for that race.
Or use the bracket racing rule from drag racing. You write your qualifing time on your window. If you run a faster lap than the qualifing time on your window you are out. Then group the cars by their stated times into race groups. That would save track time at each event by eliminating qualifing, all arguments about cheating, as only time would matter. You would have to run your best time that weekend to write on your window because if you sandbagged you would most likely "break out" in the heat of battle. This idea saved drag racing.
Sorry Greg, but the way you have it worded, you could ONLY use a larger diameter wheel and not the original size. Don't tell me it's just a given. Not when you are spelling out the sizes that MAY be used. Because if you don't say it MAY be used it cannot.
Reread it.
------------------
George Roffe
Houston, TX
84 944 ITS car under construction
92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
http://www.nissport.com
------------------
George Roffe
Houston, TX
84 944 ITS car under construction
92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
http://www.nissport.com
I disagree, George. "May" allows it; "must" requires it.
I know we're playing word games here, but if we do it my way, "may" covers it because it's an allowance over and above what is listed on the spec line. If we do it your way, the word should be changed to "must" because that limits it to ONLY what the rule reads, and the spec line must therefore be ignored.
I think either way is fine, I just think your way is redundant.
Edit: to further support my position on this, George, glance through the ITCS and look at all the occurances of the word "may". If we interpreted that word your way, then we'd all be mandated to bend our shift levers above the tunnel or floor because the rule does not specifically list that we can run it without the bend. "May" is an allowance, "must" is a requirement, thus stock wheel diameter is not required to be listed in the rule. It MAY, though (BWAH-HAH-HAH-HAH-HAH!!) - GA
[This message has been edited by GregAmy (edited December 03, 2004).]
I know we're playing word games here, but if we do it my way, "may" covers it because it's an allowance over and above what is listed on the spec line. If we do it your way, the word should be changed to "must" because that limits it to ONLY what the rule reads, and the spec line must therefore be ignored.
I think either way is fine, I just think your way is redundant.
Edit: to further support my position on this, George, glance through the ITCS and look at all the occurances of the word "may". If we interpreted that word your way, then we'd all be mandated to bend our shift levers above the tunnel or floor because the rule does not specifically list that we can run it without the bend. "May" is an allowance, "must" is a requirement, thus stock wheel diameter is not required to be listed in the rule. It MAY, though (BWAH-HAH-HAH-HAH-HAH!!) - GA
[This message has been edited by GregAmy (edited December 03, 2004).]
I'd like to make it clear, by the way, that I find this discussion of semantics to be positive conversation. I'd rather throw these ideas into the bullring and get them done in advance rather than find out later that folks are running "technically legal" MoTec ECUs (for example).
We should do this much more often.
We should do this much more often.
...and while we're patting one-another on the back, if you haven't read Dickita's (cha, cha, cha!) "Coyote and Roadrunner" analogy in the Mazda forum, you REALLY need to.
It is a GREAT illustration of why a go-slow approach to PCAs is so important, and is one of my new favorites.
K
It is a GREAT illustration of why a go-slow approach to PCAs is so important, and is one of my new favorites.
K
lateapex911
Super Moderator
It's kinda catchy, isn't it!
------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]
Indeed. But you follow "may" with choices that don't include the stock diameter, therefore one could read it that you may use one of the choices, which actually don't include the stock diameters.
------------------
George Roffe
Houston, TX
84 944 ITS car under construction
92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
http://www.nissport.com
ITCS 17.1.4.D.4.e: "Shift lever may be bent above the tunnel or floor."
Per Geo, since the rule does not specifically include the option to use the shift lever without a bend, any cars that have straight shifter levers must heretofore bend them prior to the next competition.
Per Geo, since the rule does not specifically include the option to use the shift lever without a bend, any cars that have straight shifter levers must heretofore bend them prior to the next competition.
Right Greg. You know that's not what I'm saying.
------------------
George Roffe
Houston, TX
84 944 ITS car under construction
92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
http://www.nissport.com