My car has camber adjustable upper ball joints, and those are legal for street mod. Problem is they seem to add almost an inch to the height of the knuckle/upper control arm assembly. So basically my UCA's are nailing the shock towers on even small road bumps, though seemingly rarely on smooth pavement while turning or transitioning. The 'rule' I'm asking for interpretation is:

"Any minor modification, intended to allow or facilitate any allowed modification, is permitted as long as it does not provide any intrinsic performance benefit in and of itself, does not provide a weight reduction of more than 1 lb., and is not explicitly prohibited elsewhere within these rules. This rule is intended to allow minor notching, bending, clearancing, grinding; the drilling of holes; affixing, relocating, or strengthening of brackets; removal of small parts, and similar operations performed in order to facilitate the installation of allowed parts or modifications. Competitors are strongly cautioned to make the minimum amount of modification required to affix a given part, and not to make unduly tortured interpretations of this rule. Modifications to the firewall in order to allow for increased engine setback, and any modification that changes the location of of a suspension pickup point, are explicitly forbiddden.

My question is, would this rule cover me increasing the size of the holes ( ) the bolts on the top of the camber adjusters have made when bottoming out in my shock towers, only slightly, and recover with metal and weld it back up for strength? This would not change any attachment points, and would only be for clearance and to give me back the room I lost putting those dumb things in. Would getting my travel back be considered an intrinsic benifit? Is this a tortured interpretation? I don't run SCCA now, and could easily do this in the current version of mod class that they run in my local (DCSCC) autocross group. But obviously I want to run in SCCA at some point, even if it is only once in a while. This car is going to stay a Street Mod type car forever as far as I am concerned, so I am not worried about the rules of another class.

Thanks in advance for any opinions.

 

Personally, I would not protest you for making room for a legal modification in the suspension, and I know of a lot of nationally competitive people who also wouldn't, but that doesn't tell you anything as to whether it's legal or not.

 

I'd say it is legal, as long as you do the minimum amount of fabrication required to meet your needs. Any material you add back should be of the same type/thickness as removed (no weight benefit, no strength benefit).

 

Anybody else? This is going to become important soon enough for me, as I have a friend apprenticing at a race shop that will probably be doing the work for me.

 

Send it in to Doug Gill at the SCCA and have him give you clarification. If he can't he'll shoot it over to the Street Mod Advisory Committee for review, then you'll get an official answer!

 

That's a tough one. I'd definately be interested in what Doug and/or the SEB/SMAC had to say about it. I have a somewhat similar situation on my Civic. My suspension travel is limited by the driver's side axle contacting the frame. It has contacted the frame on many occasions, and has thus dented the frame some, resulting in additional clearance for the axle. I don't think that's something that would be ruled illegal, since I didn't even do the denting, and no metal has been removed. But - if you're allowed to create clearance for your camber kit bolts, then would I be able to notch my frame and weld in a patch to allow the axle to travel farther. I would definately consider additional suspension travel to be an advantage, which is why what you're asking about is a little less clear than cutting a hole to let an intercooler pipe pass through. It's an interesing question - definately worth dropping Doug a note about it.


-Chris