FORMULA D Rule Changes...

[deadpirate]

problem pg, our car isnt a GT-R

ur saying the GT-R is stiffer than a normal "34"


our car is a normal 34...ER-34

our car is not a GT-R

[110octane]

Its no big deal, want to pull a D mac and run S13 rear end... be my damn guest. Its not custom, anyone with access to a wreaking yard can pull it off. Go for it bud.

......Since when were S13's straight axle? Did you ever bother to look under the car before assuming you knew what you were talking about and hating on Darren? He has nothing to do with any of this ridiculous thread. As always, your foot is planted firmly in your mouth. DMACs rear end was out of a 1984 Portuguese mini van and the diff was welded. Only ads fuel to your fire but it was "Pre Approved". Hahahahaa! If you don't know what your talking about don't use it as an example *Censored**Censored**Censored**Censored**Censored* *Censored*.

You're so bandwagon....

[_PG_]

Ugh you guys are god damned ridiculous. Read my damned post! I said a 2 door R34 is gonna be about 40% stiffer than the "other" 34 chassis. YOU ARE COMPARING IT TO 4 DOOR and a WAGON and trying to argue that its the same.

tyndago...
I said I was estimating, based on averages between coupes and sedans. You guys keep your f*cking head in the sand and think that nothing your team (whether your a fan, a truck driver, whatever) is doing is wrong. Hey I'm not saying you're the only illegal car in the series... I'm trying to explain to you guys WHY you're car has been protested. It makes sense to a lot of people. If you want to ignore facts, be my guest.

As for welding, rollcage, S14 chassis etc etc. You certainly gain a lot of rigidity that you might not have to begin with, but if you have a stout chassis like an R34, adding the stitch welding and good cage will only make a good thing even better. This is not arguing that. This is about the DESIGN of the unibody of an R34 that is NOTICEABLY better than the "other" 34 chassis you are trying to say is no different (therefore making your car legal).

Yeah I'm getting "owned". Haha. Take a look at who's getting penalized. No car I've ever been involved with design wise, mechanic wise, team wise anything has ever had any legality issues.

[tyndago]

Yeah I'm getting "owned". Haha. Take a look at who's getting penalized. No car I've ever been involved with design wise, mechanic wise, team wise anything has ever had any legality issues.

You must not try hard enough.

[_PG_]

problem pg, our car isnt a GT-R

ur saying the GT-R is stiffer than a normal "34"


our car is a normal 34...ER-34

our car is not a GT-R

Coupe 34 vs. Sedan 34 and Wagon 34.

Get real.



Ok, the average numbers for most manufacturers are between 25-40% increase in rigidity from Coupe to Sedan. And about 20% rigidity increase from Sedan to Wagon. So that's a 60% increase of Coupe over Wagon.

I mean, even the BEST Sport Sedans BMW 3 Series are 25-30% stiffer in Coupes vs. Sedans. And the 3 Series has the best chassis of any consumer sedan. You guys... keep trying.

[_PG_]

You must not try hard enough.

HAHAHA WHAT?
So cheating is ok if you're trying hard enough?

I'll give you that if you would just admit that SA cheated and got caught since that's been my argument the whole time. It was a really good idea, and it was sort of grey area... but its not legal.

Just like Ferrari and BMW running flexible floors on their F1 cars and then McLaren (through stolen documents) calling them out on it. And then a ruling by the FIA to deem them illegal. Do you think they bitched and moaned and said well our rule books in Italian and German were translated poorly?

No.

Just like anything "questionable" in racing they said "Ok at the next round it won't be on the car."



Why hasn't SA said that? It would make this whole mess go away. Especially if its as EASY to do as they claim since its OBVIOUSLY supposed to be on the chassis..

[tyndago]

HAHAHA WHAT?
I'll give you taht if you would just admit that SA cheated and got caught. that's been my argument the whole time. It was a really good idea, and it was sort of grey area... but its not legal. ..

I said in about my third post on this thread, that neither party handled this correctly. 2nd page ... quoting myself.

"Its all a matter of approvals and pre approvals. About showing up to the first event with a car that was built in a month. Maybe some mis-interpretation of rules. Some English to Japanese issues.

I think that this situation was not handled correctly by any of the parties involved so far."

I think its more of a translation issue, than them really trying to get something "over" on Formula Drift.

Team SA is changing the suspension back, as Formula Drift requested. However I feel they were treated unfairly, based on other vehicles in the series. The first event they showed up to , was the event at Long Beach. Formula Drift had the ability to approve the car as it sat. If it were in 26th place, you wouldn't have heard anything about the struts in the front.

In 5th place, the protests come Down Against them.

[_PG_]

So they are in the top 10 with an illegal car and you don't think they should be penalized because they aren't winning outright?

As for the other cars in question.. they are not legal by my eye, but they have petitioned FD to allow the modifications and for whatever reason they have gotten the go-ahead. Can you stop that?

The best thing to do is a Driver's Organization (NOT A UNION) and also a Team Organization. FD is a separate entity and each organization can adress issues that they have and present them to FD.

[tyndago]

Just like anything "questionable" in racing they said "Ok at the next round it won't be on the car."
Why hasn't SA said that? It would make this whole mess go away. Especially if its as EASY to do as they claim since its OBVIOUSLY supposed to be on the chassis..

Its been put out on here about six times. Team SA is putting the A-arms back on the car. June 23rd the decision came down. The team , driver, mechanic are all based in Japan. They already have a schedule of when they were coming to the US.

Changing the suspension back is no big deal. The big deal is time, and travel from Japan. The big deal is a system of rules that are broken.

Again no one has for sure answered this question in the rules...

8.3.3 Modified or aftermarket suspension parts are only allowed if pre-approved by Formula Drift.

That means every single car in the series is in violation if they don't have pre-approval. No aftermarket coil overs allowed. No one runs OEM struts, springs, etc. Every car is in violation. This sounds more like a rule for Showroom Stock than a professional drift series.

So if they would have asked, would Team SA got approval to run the struts ? If they swap back to A-arm, run the car in Vegas, and then ask for "pre-approval" to swap back to struts, will they get "pre-approval"? I am sure those changes are not as radical as a RWD Scion.

[tyndago]

So they are in the top 10 with an illegal car and you don't think they should be penalized because they aren't winning outright?.

I think they should be penalized. I just think that the punishment doesn't fit the crime.

The Team SA car is not tube frame in the front. Its not gone from leaf springs to coil overs. It doesn't run parts from a GTO in the rear. It runs OEM Nissan parts on it.

They should be fined for an inability to follow procedure, but the car should be able to run as is.

Would, they have got "pre-approval" if they asked ?

[_PG_]

Yeah I dunno the answer to those and I think that's a major fault in the rule book.

Things should be much more clear cut and transparent in their definition.

Like I've said... a driver's organization would be a great place to bring up such issues. Nothing is going to get done over an internet forum.

[OldSkool510]

Exactly. The internet forum will not bring a resolution to the situation. It's more of a plea for sympathy, if anything. Starting a thread because you didn't like the decision that was handed down won't change anything. Do you really think FORMULA D will regress from their current decision and show weakness? If anything, they will take a firmer stand and show strength. I would be afraid of repercussions.

Only if the big boys of drifting, you know the ones who are actually making money drifting, those with the big contracts with the major sponsors, step into this fray will anything get done. They're too smart to take a stand against the hand that feeds them, which is all done through the courtesy of FORMULA D. C'mon think about it guys, all this is threatening their livelihoods, too.

[courantcom]

HAHAHA WHAT?
So cheating is ok if you're trying hard enough?

I'll give you that if you would just admit that SA cheated and got caught since that's been my argument the whole time. It was a really good idea, and it was sort of grey area... but its not legal.

I don't think SA Drift did this modification with the intent of keeping it a secret and setting up a song and dance around it so that nobody would notice. These guys have been building drift cars for years, and by all means, they know what they are doing. This modification is just part of their already proven winning formula. THEREFORE, I wouldn't say that SA Drift was "cheating", and they "got caught" as a result of it.

On top of all that, I don't think they read the rules, and then figured that they could just get around it all if it ever came up at a later date. Seriously...these guys know how to build a drift car, and this is just how they get it done. There was no "foul play" intended with their actions.

Just like Ferrari and BMW running flexible floors on their F1 cars and then McLaren (through stolen documents) calling them out on it. And then a ruling by the FIA to deem them illegal. Do you think they bitched and moaned and said well our rule books in Italian and German were translated poorly?

Hmm...just out of curiousity, how exactly were they called out? Do you think that people just quietly phoned into the F1's office and mentioned something here and there, or did someone go and make this information public? Do you think that this information was kept confidential, and FIA just quietly made a ruling? I'll answer that for you, and the answer is NO. This kind of information is something that obviously got called out and brought out to the public MUCH LIKE how all this is going on right now. Someone made a big stink about it and told the world. The difference between FIA and Formula D is that FIA is a strong enough sanctioning body to be able to handle things with the professionalism required to sustain a professional sanctioning body. Granted that Formula D isn't FIA, and/or these aren't apples to apples...I'd say it's something similar, like maybe a small apple is to a large apple.

No.

Just like anything "questionable" in racing they said "Ok at the next round it won't be on the car."



Why hasn't SA said that? It would make this whole mess go away. Especially if its as EASY to do as they claim since its OBVIOUSLY supposed to be on the chassis..

It's been said a few times already here on this board. I'm going to say this once more...

1) The SA Drift car is NOT banned...it WILL be competing in Vegas, under penalty, and not being able to obtain qualifying points.
2) Parts have ALREADY arrived stateside via airfreight to restore the car to Formula D's standards. Any questions?

THE ISSUE at hand here is NOT SA Drift's intention to keep circumnavigating around the Formula D rule book. The ISSUE at hand here is how Formula D's rulebook is written, and how they go about enforcing the rules. Even you will admit that such their rulebook isn't quite up to par. If it was, this would be a clear cut issue.

[Bebop]

I'm thinking... hmmm..what if they got would have took the car here before hand and got it pre approved. Was the pre approval a part of the tech day at autobahcs? Not all the teams showed up for that.

So that means, this car was teched on the seen at long beach where a lot of other never before seen cars were teched also. Why didnt they fail them on the spot and send them home to fix the problem? Were the techs stumped?

NOTE... these are questions not assumptions

I'm not really on the whole, "OMG FD CANT DO THIS" trip anymore. I'm more of why do they have to do this. I see a tube frame, I see 100% one off rack and pinion but this....

It didnt really give the team a real edge... they won some and lost some. It didnt fall apart on the track and catch fire (its safe). I just want a good reason why?

Lets just say, bergenholtz decided there double wishbone isn't working out. And asked Formula D if they can run lets just say a S14 front end setup. Real simple, something they are used to working on. Would they be denied?

We all know rules are rules, but if the rule isn't fair is it wrong to make a debate out of it and try to come to some sort of fair agreement?

Octane, thanks for the corrections.

But....DUDE OMG, I JUST LOVE TANNER, CANT WAIT TO WATCH TOP GEAR AND BUY MY AEM INTAKE!!! OMG!!!!FTP!!!!

Like I said before, I got my favorite teams and my favorite drivers just like anyone else.

Bandwagon yes sir I am

But I notice you arent nursing that solstice/sky thread anymore... what happened man??

[courantcom]

Exactly. The internet forum will not bring a resolution to the situation. It's more of a plea for sympathy, if anything. Starting a thread because you didn't like the decision that was handed down won't change anything. Do you really think FORMULA D will regress from their current decision and show weakness? If anything, they will take a firmer stand and show strength. I would be afraid of repercussions.

Why couldn't an internet forum be one of the first steps to finding a resolution to the situation? It sure can provide a method for everyone to voice their opinions about the sitaution, as it clearly has here. Again...nobody is looking for sympathy, and you do fall into this area. You still think that SA Drift is looking for sympathy, but in all actuality, they are not. They are just saying that they will hapily abide by the rules so as long as everyone else does too. Through this thread, we have learned that other cars should also be under the same level of scrutinty that SA Drift has undergone. Those other cars are free to compete as they sit. You're probably thinking this right now, and that is that SA Drift did not seek pre-approval. Alright...that's been said a lot of times here too! Help us all with an answer to the question of whether or not SA Drift would have been granted pre-approval had they asked PRIOR to competing. If you believe the answer is "yes", then why can't they be approved NOW.

Only if the big boys of drifting, you know the ones who are actually making money drifting, those with the big contracts with the major sponsors, step into this fray will anything get done. They're too smart to take a stand against the hand that feeds them, which is all done through the courtesy of FORMULA D. C'mon think about it guys, all this is threatening their livelihoods, too.

If this thread honestly threatens the livelihoods of everyone, then maybe you should begin to question the strength of the sanctioning body that this single internet forum thread contests. Let me give you an example. Do you think a single internet thread could challenge SCCA? ...or do you think SCCA's rules and regulations are strong enough to defend the fabric of their foundation.