ST class intake rule clarification

Questions, comments, and discussions concerning COMSCC rules.

Moderators: Boondocker850, blindsidefive0

kfoote
Speed Setter
Speed Setter
Posts: 166
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2003 11:38 am

Post by kfoote » Sat Oct 15, 2005 12:19 pm

ctkag wrote:Well, I'd like to see another clarification too around the intercooler - allowing the intercooler hoses to be changed to the commonly used silicone hoses. These are post turbo but pre throttle body.

-Keith-
This is legal in all classes as the rules are written now. IX. Showroom Stock D. 4. states:

"4. Any make hoses, clamps, and belts are allowed."

ST rules reference this as being legal in ST as well.
Kevin Foote
#64 SB Nissan 350Z
1998-2003 Chief of Tech
1998-2002 BOD member
SSB Track Record Holder at LRP

SillySpheres

Post by SillySpheres » Mon Oct 17, 2005 1:12 pm

therooster wrote:I thought that boost controllers were discussed at either the rules meeting last year or the year before. I quickly looked for my notes but I am a little disorganized at the moment and can not find them. Am I crazy or does any on else remember that meeting?

Chris A.
You are correct Chris. I was the one who proposed this modification and it was voted down pretty handily. However, a new group of people are bringing it up again this year.

JackFFR1846
Speed Setter
Speed Setter
Posts: 187
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2005 12:56 pm
Location: Hopkinton, MA

another clarification, maybe?

Post by JackFFR1846 » Mon Oct 24, 2005 9:31 am

I think a slight rewrite is needed to specifically prohibit routing the air inlet to make a ram-air intake where one did not exist before. I know that my 2.5RS made noticibly more power down the straight when I sealed up the air system and took air from a duct in the airdam. (I ran ST when it was like that).

jack

User avatar
Mick
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 1088
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 2:55 pm

Post by Mick » Mon Oct 24, 2005 8:41 pm

Air flow/mass metering and air temp sensing is often done before the throttle bodies. How will we deal with meters being relocated or replaced with higher flow rates? (something I would be in favor of :twisted:) Are we in danger of this becoming a gray area? Should we clarify a bit more?

swinecanfly
Fast Lapper
Fast Lapper
Posts: 49
Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2005 10:44 pm

Post by swinecanfly » Mon Oct 24, 2005 10:54 pm

Alex's proposal sounds like it allows replacement or relocation of meters and intake temperature sensors. If it doesn't allow it specifically I would support language that does.

Craig

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest