Extended Lower Ball Joints Point Value

[veris 165]

The Miata has a double wishbone front suspension.

 

My thoughts are:

1. This ruling should apply to all ball joints. An extension of the offset bushing rule. 

2. This ruling should apply to all double wishbone suspensions. If ruling is related to camber adjustment. 

3. This ruling should be tossed and the component treated like any other unlisted part. re: 10 points each. 

 

Personally I don't care which option. I just want to see a platform agnostic ruling. 

 

One other note. I think this is a great example of the tech ticket system working. We can see what is going on, review, discuss, and then petition for a change as necessary. 

Edited April 16, 2020 by veris

[wvumtnbkr 7,318]

I feel like this is already covered under the rules...  camber caster adjustment homemade 5 pts.  Bought, 20 pts (or whatever the point value is).

 

The rule was specifically changed just a few years ago to include all camber or caster adjusting apparatus versus the old rule which specifically called out camber plates.

 

Edit...  rule below.  I added the bold and underline.  The dictionary says forward slash means "or", btw.

 

• Camber / caster adjustable plates / apparatus:
 o After market (pair): 20 pts front, 20 pts rear
 o Homemade (pair) 5 pts front, 5 pts rear
 o Stock components (strut towers, suspension
 arms, sub-frames) re-drilled/slotted for 
 adjustment: 0 pts

Edited April 18, 2020 by wvumtnbkr

[veris 165]

Are aftermarket ball joints considered homemade? [Rhetorical]

 

10 points total, 5 each doesn't met either criteria. Definitely different.  Might be an extension of offset "bushings", but that wouldn't be platform specific. 

Edited April 17, 2020 by veris

[wvumtnbkr 7,318]

10 hours ago, veris said:

Are aftermarket ball joints considered homemade? [Rhetorical]

 

10 points total, 5 each doesn't met either criteria. Definitely different.  Might be an extension of offset "bushings", but that wouldn't be platform specific. 

I took stock ball joints and cut the mounts and rewelded them to get more caster and camber.  I would have called that homemade.

 

I look at this rule pretty simply.  Is it a part that is being used on the car to change camber or caster?  If yes, it follows this rule.  Is it homemade or purchased determines the value.

[cowboys647 182]

18 minutes ago, wvumtnbkr said:

I took stock ball joints and cut the mounts and rewelded them to get more caster and camber.  I would have called that homemade.

 

I look at this rule pretty simply.  Is it a part that is being used on the car to change camber or caster?  If yes, it follows this rule.  Is it homemade or purchased determines the value.

Offset bushing are on the fixed point list which doesn’t follow your conclusions here. 

[Team Infiniti 15,387]

22 minutes ago, wvumtnbkr said:

I took stock ball joints and cut the mounts and rewelded them to get more caster and camber.  I would have called that homemade.

 

I look at this rule pretty simply.  Is it a part that is being used on the car to change camber or caster?  If yes, it follows this rule.  Is it homemade or purchased determines the value.

Disagree, cutting and re-welding is what makes this series more affordable, a builders series, purchased answers, the easy button, are the root of real life cost creep.

 

Seriously, who is going to field a car with no improvement on caster/camber?

 

 

[karman1970 979]

1 hour ago, wvumtnbkr said:

I took stock ball joints and cut the mounts and rewelded them to get more caster and camber.  I would have called that homemade.

 

I look at this rule pretty simply.  Is it a part that is being used on the car to change camber or caster?  If yes, it follows this rule.  Is it homemade or purchased determines the value.

 

Would a set of home-made adjustable tubular control arms be only 5 pts?  (What font color is half-sarcasm/half-serious?)

[veris 165]

1 hour ago, wvumtnbkr said:

I took stock ball joints and cut the mounts and rewelded them to get more caster and camber.  I would have called that homemade.

 

I look at this rule pretty simply.  Is it a part that is being used on the car to change camber or caster?  If yes, it follows this rule.  Is it homemade or purchased determines the value.

 

So are you being obtuse on purpose or did you not read the tech article?

• It was not a home made device.
• Even if it was home made [and the ruling specifically says aftermarket],  It wasn't given the homemade camber cost of 5 points for the front (or 2.5 per corner). It was given a completely new point value; 5 per corner.  

re: A. Aftermarket extended lower ball joints, used on Miatas to increase negative camber, are 5 points per corner.

[veris 165]

38 minutes ago, karman1970 said:

 

Would a set of home-made adjustable tubular control arms be only 5 pts?  (What font color is half-sarcasm/half-serious?)

 

Traditionally these would be 10 points each, but you could include heim joint in them for free based on past rulings. 

 

 

[wvumtnbkr 7,318]

2 hours ago, Team Infiniti said:

Disagree, cutting and re-welding is what makes this series more affordable, a builders series, purchased answers, the easy button, are the root of real life cost creep.

 

Seriously, who is going to field a car with no improvement on caster/camber?

 

 

What are you disagreeing with?  I think we are in agreement.  

 

I may have not been perfectly clear.  If something is being added, it needs to follow the rule in the vpi.  If you are just cutting welding drilling, etc, free.

 

For my ball joints, I had to add material so I took the 5 pts.

 

 

[wvumtnbkr 7,318]

44 minutes ago, veris said:

 

So are you being obtuse on purpose or did you not read the tech article?

• It was not a home made device.
• Even if it was home made [and the ruling specifically says aftermarket],  It wasn't given the homemade camber cost of 5 points for the front (or 2.5 per corner). It was given a completely new point value; 5 per corner.  

re: A. Aftermarket extended lower ball joints, used on Miatas to increase negative camber, are 5 points per corner.

Neither.  I'm saying the ruling is wrong in my opinion based on the rule I quoted in the bccr.

[wvumtnbkr 7,318]

2 hours ago, cowboys647 said:

Offset bushing are on the fixed point list which doesn’t follow your conclusions here. 

It does actually.  They are specifically called out, so you follow that rule.

[wvumtnbkr 7,318]

Let me clarify for all.

 

I think this new interpretation is bull crap.  We already have rules to exactly address this.

 

The rules we have should be enforced, not reinterpreted with new values.

 

If ya made it yourself and added no materials that shizz is free.

 

If ya made it yourself and added something, 5pt per pair.

 

If ya added something you bought, 20 pts per pair.

 

This particular part falls into the last category.  I have no idea how it could be interpreted any other way.

[wvumtnbkr 7,318]

1 hour ago, karman1970 said:

 

Would a set of home-made adjustable tubular control arms be only 5 pts?  (What font color is half-sarcasm/half-serious?)

Depends on if you use heim joints or not.

 

If no heim joints were used and stock type mounting hardware was used, I could see that being 5 pts /pair.  I could also see it as 10 pts per suspension part.

[veris 165]

1 hour ago, wvumtnbkr said:

Neither.  I'm saying the ruling is wrong in my opinion based on the rule I quoted in the bccr.

Sorry my misunderstanding. I thought you were suggesting the rule you quoted as an explanation of how tech came up with that number. Clearly the ruling didn't; as we both agree. 

Edited April 17, 2020 by veris

[veris 165]

1 hour ago, wvumtnbkr said:

Depends on if you use heim joints or not.

 

If no heim joints were used and stock type mounting hardware was used, I could see that being 5 pts /pair.  I could also see it as 10 pts per suspension part.

 

I had not considered that angle before. re: 5 points/pair. I think claiming tubular lower arms are actually home made camber adjusters a stretch, but it is a clever loop hole. 

[wvumtnbkr 7,318]

1 hour ago, veris said:

 

I had not considered that angle before. re: 5 points/pair. I think claiming tubular lower arms are actually home made camber adjusters a stretch, but it is a clever loop hole. 

I would have argued strongly that this was a suspension component at 10 pts.  Now, I'm not so sure and could see it being 5 pts per pair.

 

With Phil doing tech, it would certainly have been 10 pts per arm.  Not suggesting right or wrong.

[karman1970 979]

1 hour ago, veris said:

 

I had not considered that angle before. re: 5 points/pair. I think claiming tubular lower arms are actually home made camber adjusters a stretch, but it is a clever loop hole. 

 

As do I.  Mainly being a smart ass, but if they’ll let ball joints go for 5 points, who knows where that train of thought will lead us.  Something I would have never thought to ask since the rules seem very black and white to me.  It ought to be 20 points for the ball joints.  2x10 non stock suspension components or 20 for aftermarket camber adjustment.

[cowboys647 182]

3 hours ago, wvumtnbkr said:

It does actually.  They are specifically called out, so you follow that rule.

The BCCR cannot be continually modified at a moment's notice to add new components to the fixed point list so I think this is where the knowledge base can assist and assign values similarly to how they used to do this at the track but now it's completely transparent.

 

For the Miata, I'd like to know why you think the extended lower ball joints should be more points than offset bushings. They both allow more negative camber to be attained. They both can be purchased as aftermarket parts. 

[Jamie 658]

I can't even tell when these are installed, but I am blind. So I ask are we going to enforce it this rule? I declare that this mod is free, just like internals of motors. 

[theblue 924]

the more basic question I have is why single out the miata on this rule.   apply to all or none.

[wvumtnbkr 7,318]

2 hours ago, cowboys647 said:

The BCCR cannot be continually modified at a moment's notice to add new components to the fixed point list so I think this is where the knowledge base can assist and assign values similarly to how they used to do this at the track but now it's completely transparent.

 

For the Miata, I'd like to know why you think the extended lower ball joints should be more points than offset bushings. They both allow more negative camber to be attained. They both can be purchased as aftermarket parts. 

I think we should follow the bccr.  I have no input as to what the values should be.

 

If offset bushings are less pts than the camber caster apparatus, then the rules say they are less points.  No interpretation from me.

 

 

My entire point is that we should follow the bccr and not create new values out of thin air.  We especially should not be doing that for specific vehicles.

 

Petition to change the values of offset bushings if you feel that way.

 

I am not asking to add anything to the fixed points list.  It's already covered there.

 

I feel like I'm missing something...

Edited April 17, 2020 by wvumtnbkr

[cowboys647 182]

10 minutes ago, wvumtnbkr said:

I think we should follow the bccr.  I have no input as to what the values should be.

 

If offset bushings are less pts than the camber caster apparatus, then the rules say they are less points.  No interpretation from me.

 

 

My entire point is that we should follow the bccr and not create new values out of thin air.  We especially should not be doing that for specific vehicles.

 

Petition to change the values of offset bushings if you feel that way.

 

I am not asking to add anything to the fixed points list.  It's already covered there.

 

I feel like I'm missing something...

I think we are on different wavelengths. The BCCR as it sits is missing a LOT of items in the desire for a short rulebook. I agree that you could make the case that the camber apparatus clause could encompass “anything” that adjusts camber but there is already a fixed point item, offset bushings, whose purpose is to adjust camber so the precedent has been set that if an item is not specifically named in the BCCR it can be added to the fixed point list. 
 

If I didn’t submit a knowledge request, maybe I show up at the track and they tell me it’s 5pts a corner. That’s how it was done before. Then nobody else has the transparency for this mod. My submissions compared the purpose between the offset bushings and the lower ball joints which I think are very similar in the case of my Miata, they both give you the ability to get more negative camber. I think that the more additions to the fixed point list, the clearer and less confusing this will all get. 
 

Now I 100% agree with you on the model specific rules. It should be all for one and one for all. 

Edited April 17, 2020 by cowboys647
Chamber =\= camber

[wvumtnbkr 7,318]

Gotcha.

 

I think the rule is clear enough.  

 

It allows for different solutions to the same problem.

 

I see this as a cut and dried example of tech not following the bccr.

 

In other words, I can not see how this exact device doesn't fall under a purchased camber adjustment apparatus.  Just because there is a separate value for another item on the list doesn't negate this rule.  It simply clarifies it.

 

This tech ruling has muddied the water for no reason in my opinion.

[hotchkis23 1,436]

I liked it better when we could all just have our special emails....

 

That said, this is bs and needs to stay in line with the BCCR...should be 10 pts each. 

Edited April 18, 2020 by hotchkis23