Just so you know, I'm not looking to build some killer SM2 914. I just like autocrossing my street car and the old club that was REAL loose with the rules lost their site a couple years ago. Now I'm looking at potentially running some SCCA events and since I used to work registration for a couple different local clubs I hate it when people have no idea what class their car can even run in much less how their mods fit in the different classes.

From the SCCA rule book chapter 16, Street Mod & SM2

16.1 G. Subframe connectors are allowed as per Street Prepared (15.2.E).
15.2 E subframe connectors
E. Longitudinal (fore-aft) subframe connectors (“SFCs”) are permitted with the following restrictions:
1. They must only connect previously unconnected boxed frame rails on unibody vehicles.
2. Each SFC must attach at no more than three points on the unibody (e.g. front, rear, and one point in between such as a seat mount brace or rocker box brace).
3. SFCs must be bolted or welded, but welding must be to the OE subframe stampings, not to the floor pan in between.
4. No cutting of OE subframes or floorpan stampings is permitted. Drilling is permitted for mounting bolts only.
5. No cross-car/lateral/triangulated connections directly between the driver’s side and passenger’s side SFCs are permitted. Connections to OE components such as tunnel braces or closure panels via bolts are allowed and count as the third point of attachment. No alteration to the OE components is permitted.
6. SFCs may not be used to attach other components (including but not limited to torque arm front mounts or driveshaft loops) and may serve no other purpose.

Seems to me the Brad Mayeur kit and clam shells violate items 1,2 &, 3 and the Engman kit since it goes across the fire wall and joins the two sides adds item 5 to the list of reasons it is not legal.

Let me know how you interpret these rules.

Kelly

That's a pretty fine line on the Engman firewall plate.
However if you put in a standard roll bar hoop with cross brace and diagonal brace is completely legal and in my opinion makes the engman fire wall plate not needed.

Here is a technicality that will send the protester away scrathing thier head.

914 does not have sub-frames. and hence can not have subframe connectors.

FYI I did not use my fire wall piece of the kit. and I do have the hoop and braces to the rear shock towers.

Thanks for your reply.

Yeah I agree with you on that, but if they are not sub frame connectors then what are they? What specified allowance can I use to justify their legality?

I see minor strengthening allowed to suspension pickup points in 16.1.P, but the engman kit doesn't even connect to a suspension pickup point.

I suppose I could consider it a repair, but wouldn't a repair be cutting out the damaged (ie rusted for us eastern folks) area and welding in new material of comparable thickness? Doubling the whole area with thicker material seems outside the realm of a repair

Kelly

At one point I considered trying to build my car to SM2 spec, but decided against it. I agree that the long kits are not SM2 legal. "Repair" with double thickness would not be legal. I would go the cage route as Joe suggested. It seems to the be legal way to stiffen up the middle of the car.

Have any of you looked at a real SM2 car? OMG there is a lot going on that it just stupid. I decided not to build an SM2 car because it would be too expensive. Cage is legal but also pretty heavy. which requires more power and more brakes. bigger than 275 wide tires. The class is structured for newer cars. Plus 80K in upgrades.

I am pretty much going XP because I think the 914 is faster when lighter. I already have 2316 Raby kit. and a car to completely gut (Shit box with a roof). XP is more run what ya brung and to me is cheaper

Yes, I am familiar with what comprises a "real" SM2 car, but you probably have more knowledge of what it would actually take to build a "real" SM2 car than I do. Are you saying that a lot of the SM2 cars you've seen are doubling chassis members like an Engman kit does?

I can totally see why you would go the XP route instead of SM2. I haven't really been involved with SCCA since SM came on the scene. I just want make sure I run my car in a class where I'm not way outside the rules. If I can tailor future mods to a specific category like Prepared vs Mod I so much the better.

Kelly

No, I saying the cars that are doing well in SM2 are newer and have better design from the factory. 3rd Gen RX7 for example is a very stiff car. Turbo'ed Miatas are pretty stupid fast and small which helps a lot. Both cars have better suspension to start with compared to the 914.

You could always write the SEB and ask.

Again, I totally agree about SM2 rules. I've also been looking at local SCCA results and it seems the only regular competitor in FP around here is Robert Lang in a TR6. Judging his times against other guys I know through other events/clubs I think he and I could have fun running together, so I don't think writing the SEB will be worth it. I'll just throw an FP on it and see what happens. Remember, I just want to have fun with my car. If the Neuman bros. show up with their white and red FP 911 (or someone else with a national level FP car) and smoke me by several seconds, I'm perfectly OK with that.

I was investigating SM2 because I didn't know much about it and a friend of mine who didn't give a hoot about auto-x 2 or 3 years ago when I was doing a bunch of events now runs a turbo'd miata in SM2. It's not a "real" SM2 car, but he's having a good time. We've talked about me driving down and going to some events with him this summer and knowing some of the mods on my car he had suggested SM2.

I just wanted to get some feed back from some people who did SCCA events in the 2008 season and I got that. Thanks.

Kelly

By "real" I think Joe means a car built to the limits of any given class.....if not, that's how I use it. A car that is nationally competitive fills that bill. But remember, those are few & far between in the "fast & loose" classes.

We run E Mod but could run XP or FP by adding ballast......I hate that. Here in the NW, we can be "competitive" in any of these classes. There are a couple of cars
that are close (or past national winners) to the top in XP & FP.

We may run XP this next season just to get some close competition....at the National Tour event.
We have the local E Mod guys handled even tho we are a couple seconds (per pass) off the the pace of E Mod national winner.

I am using "real" in the same sense.

Actually I was just looking at picts of your car. I'm surprised there is enough clearance between your inner rear suspension reinforcement tube and the lower valve covers to remove the valve covers without lowering the motor. I know you've posted a pict of your motor, but are you using carrera lower valve covers? I know using the old covers gives you a lot more room.

Thanks,

Kelly

Heh......no fool here. I install the Carrera covers after the engine is installed & grind till they fit. The tube wasn't a problem, but....

When I switched over to the needle bearings at the swing arms I did have a problem. The threaded end of the new pivot shaft is longer that the stocker and they were a no go......close don't count here. It may have something to do with weld distorsion on the ears after adding a doubler plate to those.

[quote name='J P Stein' date='Dec 29 2008, 08:22 AM' post='1115071']
Heh......no fool here. I install the Carrera covers after the engine is installed & grind till they fit. The tube wasn't a problem
[/quote]

Yeah i figured you must be running the carrera covers. Agree, engine in and then grind to fit.

[/quote]
When I switched over to the needle bearings at the swing arms I did have a problem. The threaded end of the new pivot shaft is longer that the stocker and they were a no go......close don't count here. It may have something to do with weld distorsion on the ears after adding a doubler plate to those.
[/quote]

So if you don't mind me asking, were you able to shorten the new pivot shaft? What did you do?

Thanks for the picts.

Kelly

I didn't shorten the shaft. I put them in some years back but figured the extra length could come come in handy at some time. Sure enuff, it did when I added that 3/16 plate to the ear. Still get full thread on the bolt. Taint' much left on the ribs of that Carrera cover tho....but no leaky. 3 sessions of grinding on the covers.

If you ain't handsome, you better be handy.....Red Green.

good to know. Thanks.

Kelly

Unless you expect to be competing nationally, or ruling the roost locally, I wouldn't worry too much about it. It sounds like your car will not be anywhere close to the limit of the rules in preparation. If you start winning locally, maybe you should move into another class, or if you plan on competing at National Level events, then pick a prepared class. But for just having fun locally, I say run it in SM2 and have fun...

yeah, the cage can be a big help...

-Josh2

Josh,

Yeah I hear you. I'm probably over analyzing this. I just like to know where I'm legal, and where I'm not. After reading the SM rules more I realize my glass rear quarters, glass rear deck, and front calipers on the back (no e-brake) also put me out of SM2. My past experience at these smaller local events is that most of the more modded classes have pretty thin participation. I'll be up front and ask to run FP. If they want to bump me to SM2 or some kind of Mod class because I'd be running alone I'll happily go. The group I used to run with always used EM as the "catch all" class. I ran there 99% of the time even though Mod cars are required to run a roll bar and a electrical cutoff and I have niether.

Kelly

My take on "stiffening kits". All they do is transfer stress to an area that is not doubled up. The chassis breaks somewhere else.

Seam welding does a very good job of mitigating cracks....particularly on pinch seams.....around the ears and the arch over the axles. It does not prevent the front and back sections from moving independently, however, nor does any stiffening kit.

One of the first thing that pro teams do for prep is strip a chassis and seam weld....continuous or skip weld......including the Porsche factory on their cup (et al)
cars. Taint just for fun.

That's what I am doing in SM2, just enjoying running. I don't come in first, but definitely don't come in last. There is a kid in a 350Z I usually edge out by .5 seconds or so. I tell him I have 115hp and it just pisses him off.

Good times, good times...

Unfortunately I did not know what I know now when I had this car stripped to the tub about 8 years ago. Since my first 914 was a total rust bucket and came apart at pretty much every seam, I did seam or skip weld a lot of this car particularly in the longs, suspension pickup points, and over the axles. I also did a lot of doubling on the consoles and outer suspension points. I did not spend a lot of time on the inner longs where they meet the seat members or the rear shock towers. Judging by some of your other posts I need to spend some time there or just wait for it to crack.

I hear you on the stiffening kits. You get the most benefit by changing the structure not just adding metal to the current one. Additionally, you will always break the weakest link. I did the engman kit mainly because last summer I discovered cracks on the inner longs on both sides. The passenger side was cracked pretty much from front to back and the driver side was cracked near the e-brake where it hooks up to the cross piece that holds the seat. When I started repairing the cracks it seemed to me the thickness of the inner long was compromised in some areas due to rust. This car is real clean for an east coast car. The hell hole wasn't even rusted through, but was rusty so I doubled that area. I figured if I just welded the cracks I would probably have cracks adjacent to the welds in the not too distant future. That's what happened with my first 914. The engman kit seemed like a good way to keep the inner longs from cracking again, for a while at least.

Kelly

The 914's chassis was never intended to take the loads we put on them nowdays
and they are 30 odd years old. Patches won't do it. They need outside help.

Hell they were not designed for stresses of Lemans or other 70's and 80's race series either but they did great there without a ton of reinforcements. Dwight Mitchells old SCCA racer didnt have all that much reinforcement.

....and your point is?

Reinforcements are generally overated for most causal club AX and trackday events on cars that have been properly maintained and not allowed to rust. This is especially true on narrow body cars. There are several SCCA 914 champs that did very little reinforcment of some of their 914's but they used tubs that were in good condition. They were ones who discouraged me from adding extra weight of reinforcements after seeing condition of my tub.

My car was good example of a very well maintained 914 with low miles not needing any reinforcment. No aditional bracing other than the cage, but even before cage it was not a flexy flier and I ran slicks then.

I think people confuse chasis integrity issues related to rust or overall fatigue from very high mile cars. Now granted high percent of cars suffer from neglect, but I would focus on actual sections that have become weakend rather than a generic approach.

But JP we all know your the expert AX'r so please "learn us". I guess your still pissed that Dan and I waxed you at the Shootout in a less powerful, unreinforced 914?

I agree XP is a far more competive class for the 914. SM attracts a real spendy crowd and in our region all the fast SM cars are typically faster than XP. My 914 won most of the XP class events I entered.

I made that mistake with you once, it won't happen again.

I didn't mind having Dan beat me the first day...he's a gracious winner and a circumspect (edit) looser, you are neither.

<snicker!>