91 civic autocross car with a jimfab crossmember?
Is the JimFab crossmember a good idea for this kind of application
Predicted car setup
b18b motor with ys1 lsd tranny
kyb agx struts with eibach prosprings
How does this change camber/allingment issues?
thanks
Predicted car setup
b18b motor with ys1 lsd tranny
kyb agx struts with eibach prosprings
How does this change camber/allingment issues?
thanks
I'm not really familiar with the piece you're talking about so this may not be relevant at all. But, SM does have a chassis allowance or two involving bolt-on subframe braces. However, weld-on subframe braces are illegal. I haven't paid much attention to chassis rules since I haven't had any issues with my EK, but I do know that SM is beginning to divert from SP in some areas...
But, SM does have a chassis allowance or two involving bolt-on subframe braces. However, weld-on subframe braces are illegal.
Trending Topics
its a complete non OEM crossmember, im just not to clear on the rules for this, but regardless do you think its a good investment? has anyone tried this out for track or autocross?
I believe the JimFab and Z10, etc. are illegal under the current SM ruleset. They're not considered suspension parts under the rules. And justifying them as something like an SFC's doesn't fly since they traverse the chasis. Some argue that what the suspension attaches too (if not the chasis) should also be included as the suspension...
Dennis Grant (the "father" of SM) wanted suspension to be free, but also wanted to prevent people from getting custom subframes with perfect suspension geometries. However, recently it seems he's changed his mind partly because of the Mustang contingent who want to use things like the Griggs GR40 stuff. I've heard him mention that he's thinking about changing the suspension rule to basically:
1) take everything off the car
2) the factory holes left in the chasis are available to bolt up whatever you can fabricate/buy
3) the minute you break out the welder to mod the chasis though, that will be illegal
Not sure when or if this has changed, but the SM yahoo message board can be searched for the history on this topic. There was also a heated argument in the SM/SM2 board on SCCAforums.com.
So I'd say hold off on doing this until the rule changes. You'll already have the stock oem x-member and radius rods until then. The stuff that you would gain with the JimFab can be done other ways (grinding for header clearance, some fabbing could make the stock radius rods adjustable, etc.). Its not supposed to be anylighter than stock to maintain strength.
[Modified by XrcR6, 6:59 PM 3/3/2003]
Dennis Grant (the "father" of SM) wanted suspension to be free, but also wanted to prevent people from getting custom subframes with perfect suspension geometries. However, recently it seems he's changed his mind partly because of the Mustang contingent who want to use things like the Griggs GR40 stuff. I've heard him mention that he's thinking about changing the suspension rule to basically:
1) take everything off the car
2) the factory holes left in the chasis are available to bolt up whatever you can fabricate/buy
3) the minute you break out the welder to mod the chasis though, that will be illegal
Not sure when or if this has changed, but the SM yahoo message board can be searched for the history on this topic. There was also a heated argument in the SM/SM2 board on SCCAforums.com.
So I'd say hold off on doing this until the rule changes. You'll already have the stock oem x-member and radius rods until then. The stuff that you would gain with the JimFab can be done other ways (grinding for header clearance, some fabbing could make the stock radius rods adjustable, etc.). Its not supposed to be anylighter than stock to maintain strength.
[Modified by XrcR6, 6:59 PM 3/3/2003]
Yeah, thanks for the inside skinny. XrcR6, your post helped clear up alot of things for me. Now on to making the stock radius arms adjustable...
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by thirdvector »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"> Now on to making the stock radius arms adjustable...</TD></TR></TABLE>
http://www.opmmotorsports.com
http://www.opmmotorsports.com
Hmm. I assume those spherical bearings are not allowed in STS. The washers however might be okay. I really need to get a SCCA rule book. Thanks again.
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by thirdvector »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Hmm. I assume those spherical bearings are not allowed in STS. The washers however might be okay. I really need to get a SCCA rule book. Thanks again.</TD></TR></TABLE>
They're a (sort of) direct replacement for the front radius rod bushes
They're a (sort of) direct replacement for the front radius rod bushes
Yeah.. I do know that you can replace susp bushings with anything EXCEPT metal. Dern it. At the same time I guess the rule allows me to be competitive with a streetable car.
OPM Radius Rod bushings are legal for SCCA SM though, right? I want to go with a JimFab bar, since I am about 1-1.5 years from running SCCA regularly, but will go with the OPM pieces probably, cuz they cost less and I am a cheap bastard!
Yes, for StreetMod/StreetMod2 they'd be legal.
For Street Prepared and Street Touring S they'd be illegal, gotta be non-metallic. I think these are are also ITA legal. So if that's the case, the only exception to the above is if you ran an ITA prep'ed car in its corresponding SP class.
For Street Prepared and Street Touring S they'd be illegal, gotta be non-metallic. I think these are are also ITA legal. So if that's the case, the only exception to the above is if you ran an ITA prep'ed car in its corresponding SP class.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
EM2Civic
Honda Civic / Del Sol (1992 - 2000)
4
Apr 16, 2004 06:56 AM




