Body Swap rule- ITR shell pretending to be an RS, and vice versa
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 10,399
Likes: 3
From: Chicagoland, IL
Body Swap rule- ITR shell pretending to be an RS, and vice versa
In the H-C rules, it clearly states that body swaps are allowed, as long as no advantages are given with the swap.
Would the H3/H4 Integra guys rather use an ITR shell? It's heavier... and I'm not sure with a cage that the structural advantages still matter at all.
What do you think? If the ITR has structural "advantages", then could you therefore use an RS shell for an H2 ITR?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
7.10.1 Body Swaps
a) Vehicle body swaps are permitted in the event of a collision that renders a car’s tub “unusable.”
b) The body swapped into must have no structural advantages over the original body.
c) The trim level of the car as it is classed for competition must remain intact. Mixing and matching of
trim levels is not permitted. Examples of body swaps:
Legal: A H3 Integra GS-R may be rebuilt from an Integra RS tub. The “advantages” of the
RS shell are the lack of sunroof and ABS – both of which may be removed under these
rules.
Illegal: An H3 Integra GS-R may not be rebuilt using an Integra Type R shell. The Type R
shell has structural reinforcements that are not available on RS/LS/GS/GS-R Integras.
Would the H3/H4 Integra guys rather use an ITR shell? It's heavier... and I'm not sure with a cage that the structural advantages still matter at all.
What do you think? If the ITR has structural "advantages", then could you therefore use an RS shell for an H2 ITR?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
7.10.1 Body Swaps
a) Vehicle body swaps are permitted in the event of a collision that renders a car’s tub “unusable.”
b) The body swapped into must have no structural advantages over the original body.
c) The trim level of the car as it is classed for competition must remain intact. Mixing and matching of
trim levels is not permitted. Examples of body swaps:
Legal: A H3 Integra GS-R may be rebuilt from an Integra RS tub. The “advantages” of the
RS shell are the lack of sunroof and ABS – both of which may be removed under these
rules.
Illegal: An H3 Integra GS-R may not be rebuilt using an Integra Type R shell. The Type R
shell has structural reinforcements that are not available on RS/LS/GS/GS-R Integras.
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 635
Likes: 0
From: Fairfax, Va, Fairfax
Re: Body Swap rule- ITR shell pretending to be an RS, and vice versa (Chris F)
Chris it's open to interpretation and getting approval from your regions director. All three of our ex-Grand Am Cup integras are GSR shells with LS tranny and engines. Since there is no structural advantage (acutally with sunroofs there is a disadvantage) you can use them.
Hence if I wanted to go to H2 I theoretically could swap a Type R motor into my GSR and run H2.
The question you are asking however, is swaping a GSR motor into a Type R chassis. That would be illegal in H3 since the Type R shell has structural advantages over the GSR shell. Doing so would put you in H1.
Hope this helps.
JK
Hence if I wanted to go to H2 I theoretically could swap a Type R motor into my GSR and run H2.
The question you are asking however, is swaping a GSR motor into a Type R chassis. That would be illegal in H3 since the Type R shell has structural advantages over the GSR shell. Doing so would put you in H1.
Hope this helps.
JK
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 10,399
Likes: 3
From: Chicagoland, IL
Re: Body Swap rule- ITR shell pretending to be an RS, and vice versa (FLATOUTRACING)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by FLATOUTRACING »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">The question you are asking however, is swaping a GSR motor into a Type R chassis. That would be illegal in H3 since the Type R shell has structural advantages over the GSR shell. Doing so would put you in H1.</TD></TR></TABLE>
Yes. That's the question I'm asking. Is this structural "advantage" an advantage at all in a caged car?
If this were legal, would all the H4 guys spend 10K finding ITR shells and put cages in those instead?
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by tnord »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">min weights would be the same either way would they not?</TD></TR></TABLE>
Yeah, min weights in each class couldn't change.
But would you rather have the extra weight in factory chassis stiffening, or in ballast? *shrug* Since you can build the cage using the rules to strengthen the chassis in any way you want, I don't see the so-called "advantage".
-Chris
Yes. That's the question I'm asking. Is this structural "advantage" an advantage at all in a caged car?
If this were legal, would all the H4 guys spend 10K finding ITR shells and put cages in those instead?
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by tnord »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">min weights would be the same either way would they not?</TD></TR></TABLE>
Yeah, min weights in each class couldn't change.
But would you rather have the extra weight in factory chassis stiffening, or in ballast? *shrug* Since you can build the cage using the rules to strengthen the chassis in any way you want, I don't see the so-called "advantage".
-Chris
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 2,882
Likes: 0
From: Future Site of the Runoffs, USA
Re: Body Swap rule- ITR shell pretending to be an RS, and vice versa (Chris F)
i agree, the advantage is in the placement of the ballast, which i'm guessing is marginal.
Member
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,637
Likes: 0
From: Northern, CA, USA
Re: Body Swap rule- ITR shell pretending to be an RS, and vice versa (Chris F)
interesting discussion http://www.nasaforums.com/viewtopic.php?t=1157
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 10,399
Likes: 3
From: Chicagoland, IL
Re: Body Swap rule- ITR shell pretending to be an RS, and vice versa (ekim952522000)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by ekim952522000 »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">interesting discussion http://www.nasaforums.com/viewtopic.php?t=1157</TD></TR></TABLE>
Thanks!
OK, so to the spirit of the rules, a B18C5 and 5-lug swap into an LS (i.e. Erik95LS's car) could be H2 legal.
It seems like the structural differences are of no matter, since a cage gets you more structure than anything else, and if you really want to stiffen up the rear, you can use it as ballast too. I suppose.
So, why not swap an ITR down to H4?
-Chris
Thanks!
OK, so to the spirit of the rules, a B18C5 and 5-lug swap into an LS (i.e. Erik95LS's car) could be H2 legal.
It seems like the structural differences are of no matter, since a cage gets you more structure than anything else, and if you really want to stiffen up the rear, you can use it as ballast too. I suppose.
So, why not swap an ITR down to H4?
-Chris
Trending Topics
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 635
Likes: 0
From: Fairfax, Va, Fairfax
Re: Body Swap rule- ITR shell pretending to be an RS, and vice versa (Chris F)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Chris F »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Yes. That's the question I'm asking. Is this structural "advantage" an advantage at all in a caged car?
If this were legal, would all the H4 guys spend 10K finding ITR shells and put cages in those instead?
</TD></TR></TABLE>
In Honda Challenge it's doubtful it would make a huge difference. HC isn't speed world challenge.
It's also highly doubtful people would swap everything over to a Type R chassis. If you were building an H4 car.....sure you'd look for one, but I doubt anyone is going to ditch their current set up for one.
If this were legal, would all the H4 guys spend 10K finding ITR shells and put cages in those instead?
</TD></TR></TABLE>
In Honda Challenge it's doubtful it would make a huge difference. HC isn't speed world challenge.
It's also highly doubtful people would swap everything over to a Type R chassis. If you were building an H4 car.....sure you'd look for one, but I doubt anyone is going to ditch their current set up for one.
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 2,882
Likes: 0
From: Future Site of the Runoffs, USA
Re: Body Swap rule- ITR shell pretending to be an RS, and vice versa (FLATOUTRACING)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by FLATOUTRACING »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
In Honda Challenge it's doubtful it would make a huge difference. HC isn't speed world challenge.
It's also highly doubtful people would swap everything over to a Type R chassis. If you were building an H4 car.....sure you'd look for one, but I doubt anyone is going to ditch their current set up for one.
</TD></TR></TABLE>
it depends how competitive the class gets. i "stamp-down-garauntee" it would happen in SM if a similar rule was legal in our class. ie - 1.8 motors in 1.6 bodies.
In Honda Challenge it's doubtful it would make a huge difference. HC isn't speed world challenge.
It's also highly doubtful people would swap everything over to a Type R chassis. If you were building an H4 car.....sure you'd look for one, but I doubt anyone is going to ditch their current set up for one.
</TD></TR></TABLE>
it depends how competitive the class gets. i "stamp-down-garauntee" it would happen in SM if a similar rule was legal in our class. ie - 1.8 motors in 1.6 bodies.
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 10,399
Likes: 3
From: Chicagoland, IL
Re: Body Swap rule- ITR shell pretending to be an RS, and vice versa (tnord)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by tnord »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">it depends how competitive the class gets. i "stamp-down-garauntee" it would happen in SM if a similar rule was legal in our class. ie - 1.8 motors in 1.6 bodies. </TD></TR></TABLE>
Even if they have to run at the 1.8L weight, too? Would they get an advantage over the newer-chassis 1.8L cars?
Are the 1.6L cars competitive as-is?
Even if they have to run at the 1.8L weight, too? Would they get an advantage over the newer-chassis 1.8L cars?
Are the 1.6L cars competitive as-is?
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 2,882
Likes: 0
From: Future Site of the Runoffs, USA
Re: Body Swap rule- ITR shell pretending to be an RS, and vice versa (Chris F)
yes, yes, and yes.
no doubt.
i'm assuming that the 1.6 chassis is lighter in race trim. i know the 1.6's from the factory are lighter than the 1.8's, but i don't know what they weigh as a shell.
no doubt.
i'm assuming that the 1.6 chassis is lighter in race trim. i know the 1.6's from the factory are lighter than the 1.8's, but i don't know what they weigh as a shell.
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 10,399
Likes: 3
From: Chicagoland, IL
Re: Body Swap rule- ITR shell pretending to be an RS, and vice versa (tnord)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by tnord »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">yes, yes, and yes.
no doubt.
i'm assuming that the 1.6 chassis is lighter in race trim. i know the 1.6's from the factory are lighter than the 1.8's, but i don't know what they weigh as a shell.</TD></TR></TABLE>
But, with a min weight set, they should weigh the same.
The ITR/LS/GSR question is a wee bit different, since they are all trim levels of the same car in the same year.
Sure, the chassis stiffening is nice, but you can get the same chassis stiffening and more, legally by the rules.
no doubt.
i'm assuming that the 1.6 chassis is lighter in race trim. i know the 1.6's from the factory are lighter than the 1.8's, but i don't know what they weigh as a shell.</TD></TR></TABLE>
But, with a min weight set, they should weigh the same.
The ITR/LS/GSR question is a wee bit different, since they are all trim levels of the same car in the same year.
Sure, the chassis stiffening is nice, but you can get the same chassis stiffening and more, legally by the rules.
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 2,882
Likes: 0
From: Future Site of the Runoffs, USA
Re: Body Swap rule- ITR shell pretending to be an RS, and vice versa (Chris F)
and they would weigh the same as they roll across the scales. but i garauntee people would do it to be able to have more ballast in the places they want it without even the slightest notion of better chassis stiffness.
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 10,399
Likes: 3
From: Chicagoland, IL
Re: Body Swap rule- ITR shell pretending to be an RS, and vice versa (tnord)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by tnord »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">and they would weigh the same as they roll across the scales. but i garauntee people would do it to be able to have more ballast in the places they want it without even the slightest notion of better chassis stiffness.</TD></TR></TABLE>
Well, you Spec Pinata guys have a more strict ruleset. I can use the roll cage to stiffen anything I want, and therefore ballast anywhere I want. Mounting plates can also cover the entire rear wheelwell, or anything else.
This is all well and fun to debate, and I see your points. This is mostly a hypothetical question, I don't think I'll *actually* try to go down to H4 but I do need to find a plan for how to get out of HU.
-Chris
4.9 Roll Cage
All cars shall have a NASA CCR-compliant roll cage. Additionally,
1) Any number of additional mounting points may be used.
2) Any number of additional tubes may be used, even for chassis stiffening.
3) Any size mounting plate may be used, subject to material and minimum specifications in the
NASA CCR. .
4) Two (2) forward cage braces per side (total of four(4)) may pass through the firewall and connect
at no more than two (2) mounting points in the engine compartment (i.e. strut tower or frame).
5) Tubes may be welded at any contact point, or even be “seam welded.”
6) If modification number 4.9.4 and/or 4.9.5 above is utilized, an additional thirty (30) pound weight
penalty will apply.
7) All tubes that are added shall be inspected for safety reasons. Any tube deemed to be hazardous
to the driver must be removed
Well, you Spec Pinata guys have a more strict ruleset. I can use the roll cage to stiffen anything I want, and therefore ballast anywhere I want. Mounting plates can also cover the entire rear wheelwell, or anything else.
This is all well and fun to debate, and I see your points. This is mostly a hypothetical question, I don't think I'll *actually* try to go down to H4 but I do need to find a plan for how to get out of HU.
-Chris
4.9 Roll Cage
All cars shall have a NASA CCR-compliant roll cage. Additionally,
1) Any number of additional mounting points may be used.
2) Any number of additional tubes may be used, even for chassis stiffening.
3) Any size mounting plate may be used, subject to material and minimum specifications in the
NASA CCR. .
4) Two (2) forward cage braces per side (total of four(4)) may pass through the firewall and connect
at no more than two (2) mounting points in the engine compartment (i.e. strut tower or frame).
5) Tubes may be welded at any contact point, or even be “seam welded.”
6) If modification number 4.9.4 and/or 4.9.5 above is utilized, an additional thirty (30) pound weight
penalty will apply.
7) All tubes that are added shall be inspected for safety reasons. Any tube deemed to be hazardous
to the driver must be removed
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,318
Likes: 0
From: Crystal Lake, IL, USA
Re: Body Swap rule- ITR shell pretending to be an RS, and vice versa (Chris F)
I would think that with an R down to LS/RS/GSR there should, at minimum, be a weight penalty imposed for using a type R shell. It does afterall include additional welds for the explicit purpose of chassis stiffening. 
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 8,119
Likes: 0
From: WV, USA
Re: Body Swap rule- ITR shell pretending to be an RS, and vice versa (CRX-RX)
Are you trying to get me to compete in H2 Chris? 
I think if I were building a race car for HC my ideal shell would definitely be RS depending of course on the class I'm going to run in with regaurds to engine use. If a c5 5 lug non-R were legal in H2 then I would definitely choose that over the R shell. As light as I've seen them get it would be more than worth it to be able to put the ballast where you want it. In my opinion.
I think if I were building a race car for HC my ideal shell would definitely be RS depending of course on the class I'm going to run in with regaurds to engine use. If a c5 5 lug non-R were legal in H2 then I would definitely choose that over the R shell. As light as I've seen them get it would be more than worth it to be able to put the ballast where you want it. In my opinion.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
