Grufton

That there is the most important point in my opinion.

I think there is a key difference in most of the items you reference, except the convertible weight (that was definitely bogus). In the rest, the rules were changed. In this situation, the rules still say you have to run the stock part with a swap or pay points. For the most part I'd shut up if they'd just be up front about it. As it stands, I wonder what other special rules I don't know about. Here's where I insert a joke about the Opel getting free fuel capacity, but then again maybe I haven't been around long enough for it to be funny...

Looks pretty hypocritical to me.

Seriously? You should have used green font, since your car is one of the examples. If I'm wrong, show me which rule allows for a non-OE exhaust manifold for zero points.

I'll say it again, per the rules if it's not stock it's points. Nothing is said on whether or not the stock part fits, that's a choice the builder makes when they pick the combination. We should treat every car the same. When I was researching potential engine swaps some had transverse/longitudinal issues. I assumed I'd need to pay points for a header if the combination didn't fit. That's what the rules say after all. I get it that the BoD is trying to make the best of 47 million combinations and about as many view points. However, enforcing rules different than written should never be tolerated. The optics are even worse when a BoD member is driving one of those examples.

There are behind the scenes allowances for some cars, but that is not in the rules.

I would argue that you've contradicted yourself here. The ability to do a platform swap is a clear indicator that it's the same "generation".

I think what LuckyKid is trying to say is that all engine swaps "must use the highest valued model from its generation" per BCCR 4.5.6. The question then is whether or not the AP1 and AP2 are separate generations. Given that the chassis appears to be the same, I would say they're the same generation, but the implementation of this rule is wildly inconsistent. For example, a 1984 E30 318i and 1990 E30 325is are treated as the same generation, while the 1989 944S and 1989 944S2 are not. I assume the point is moot here though, since I can't imagine anyone would want to swap in a less powerful motor and start 5+ laps down.

I don't see how that is relevant. It's not stock, it should be points, period. Same goes for the Ecotec engine in a Miata, or the Maxima/350 engine in a 240. If you want to use dyno numbers, I can get some plots showing the LS1 makes the same power as an M54, so I should be able to swap that in for free, too.

So can we all swap to another manifold as long as it's not a "true racing header"? The M52 manifold would look great on my M54 instead of the awful catalytic converter mess it comes with. Why can't we all play by the same rules?

Ok, back on topic. Doc - what is your stance here? Should this be fixed?

Rule 3.2. Roll Cage Design / Tech interpretation and enforcement is that upper and lower foot well protection bars can be added forward of the A pillar and can pass through the engine firewall on both sides for safety, no points. Upper, and lower bars, both sides. That's four. How about the free manifold swaps? Can we fix that, too?

In answer to Jer, I'm saying that the BCCR says only two penetrations or it's points, while tech says you can have four for no points, and it doesn't appear anyone on the BoD has done anything about it.

BCCR 3.2.10. Roll-cages MAY contain a maximum of 2 tubes inside the front engine or storage compartment and each tube MUST terminate prior to the centerline of the front axle. Rule 3.2. Roll Cage Design / Tech interpretation and enforcement is that upper and lower foot well protection bars can be added forward of the A pillar and can pass through the engine firewall on both sides for safety, no points.

Free intake or exhaust manifold swap for Maxima/240 or ecotec miata. Who knows if there are more.