Latest rule changes (and proposed changes) for Solo:
http://www.scca.com/documents/Fastrack/ ... h-solo.pdf

If you run ST* and have any kind of body kit that wasn't a factory option you probably should be writing a letter if you'd like to keep it

Very stupid rule - the ST classes were originally created to give the "ricer" crowds a place to play. Virtually every car that would fit that category that drives around locally has some sort of body mods.

Personally, if our local guys wanted to run their body kits, I would not be opposed. Anyone that would think that adding a body kit improves a cars performance at autox speeds (especially with ST cars on street tires) has rocks in their head. If anything, the added weight just slows the car down

unrelated....htf did you post @ 9:22am when my clock says its 8:56?

ooohh, we're on middle of the Atlantic Ocean time....

either that or everyone on this forum is so fast we just live an hour in the future.

Apparently hollis and others are talking about replacement bumper covers made from a single layer of molded glass to shave weight, as well as something about splitters on civics. Maybe sean can elaborate? Regardless if this goes it's going to screw anyone with a non-oem lip (or even one that wasn't an option) on their car if they go to a divisional or nationals. dumb.

Ha. Hollis is the LAST guy who should be talking about stuff like this.

You have to update your time zone and DST settings in your profile. It's not the board. It's you.

ohh I live in the future. lets keep it that way, lol.

The fiberglass is kinda concerning, but wings and splitters are cheap, and there isn't definitive evidence that they even work. When the Fastrack came out, I even saw STU people being happy the new wording could potentially allow them to remove spoilers that they couldn't before.

I agree with the Mark Andy conclusion - let them wrap their bumpers in saran wrap if they want.

Okay, maybe allowing saran wrap isn't the best idea, but the point is, what difference does it make? You're talking about replacing a little plastic bumper cover that isn't very heavy to begin with. Then let's say you add a splitter... soooo, you're right back where you started, and the splitter almost certainly isn't working as intended since the speeds are low and an ST-legal splitter isn't a real splitter (not allowed to go under the car).

Or let's say you don't add the splitter and you're saving what - 5lbs? 10lbs? That's within margin of error. All it takes is a bad start or a missed shift or a generally bad day and that advantage evaporates, along with any others you may have concocted. And I can just as easily save 5 or 10lbs by cutting down on the calorie intake - so again, what's the point?

When it comes to the splitting-hairs rules like this, it kinda makes you wonder how much of this still really comes down to driving.

I don't know, you tell us, Moton boy.

I have Montonz and I still suck.

Doesn't that kind of prove my point?

On the flip side he's the perfect guy to be talking about this.
He's on the committee, he's been around since the dawn of time, he can drive extremely consistently and so evaluate the potential benefit of shaving 10-20 pounds from the extreme front of the car, and we know that every once in a blue moon he can play fast and loose with the rules.
I'm just saying that someone like him taking advantage of a rule, or pointing out how a "creative interpretation" could give an advantage might lead to re-writing it to make sense to people with common sense.
When him and Jason Rhoades start showing up with single layer front bumpers weighing a single pound and have wings on their hoods, we can all laugh. We'll all get beaten, but we can laugh.

ST guys, you can write to SEB@scca.com with your grief. If you don't they seriously won't know you have a problem with a rule. If they get enough complaints they might just make lips free. If you have a really constructive criticism it might even make it into the rules. something like: oem or aftermarket lips allowed if they don't hang any lower than 1" below the next lowest part of the body and stick out no further than 1" or something like that. Easy to measure and enforce, opens up all kinds of cosmetic lips.

just my .02.

The margin of victory for ST last year at nationals was about .85 seconds. I don't think 10-15 lbs saved in a 2000 lb car is going to make enough difference to matter. the bumper covers on my 6 are huge and they still can't weigh more than 10 or 15 lbs each. I doubt you'd be able to shave much more than half that off of each end with even the lightest weave of glass you can find and the ability to vacuum bag your molds to get as much of the resin off as you can. the "**** it put whatever you want on it" approach is probably the easiest for the class (as long as the other body panels are stock...sorry dave )

next easiest would probably be Niles approach above, basically stating that you can add lips etc. in addition to the stock bumper covers as long as they are within some reasonable window. This would help to keep some of the unobtanium bumper covers that have been hinted at out.

FWIW, in '08 the gap between first and second was .026. The winning car had Motonz, the second place car plain ol' 8041s.

And the majority of divisional, national and Pro events come down to the 0.0xx second margin as well.

Looking outside the local pool for a second, ST_ classes are enjoying good contingency awards and tire wars. People are going to extremes with the rules. With ST being a spec-class, any advantage is worth exploring.

+1 on what Niles and Jay said. A well written, professional email, especially from those holding SCCA memberships, go a long way in influencing the SEB. People think they can bark at a local meeting, divisional or SEB Town Hall at Nationals. The SEB meets all year and is under some pretty tight deadlines, so comment now or suck it up later!