Quote:
Originally Posted by justinco
The way the rule is worded it just says "US accessory catalog" and "STi brand" is just a part of that catalog. It does not say "performance" which is what is explicitly prohibited while "accessory" is explicitly allowed.
I haven't heard any protests in regards to it, but like I said I have seen people with them at Nats. The TRD bits are a little different I think, they are performance enhancing whereas I do not see a front lip being a performance enhancement.
I actually think the chances are very high of the STi under-spoilers surviving a protest. I'm no expert in protests, but the protester would have to provide clear evidence that it is not allowed, or provides a performance benefit, right? On the other hand, there is clear evidence that it is allowed
Anyways, Spring Nats is a good time to look into potential protests, so I'll have it on the car and ask around. I don't think it will be a big deal and worst case I will just take it off for Nats, not that I think I will be in contention for it to matter anyways :p
|
STi is EXACTLY like TRD, NISMO, and friends. You really think you can convince a PC that they are different somehow? Also, you really think the title on the catalog matters compared to the spirit of the rule? Toyota could publish the same bits in the "Toyota US accessory catalog" with TRD stampings and it would be just as illegal IMO; just because the TRD parts catalog gets embedded in another catalog does not suddenly make it legal.
2nd...why do you want to install it if there's no performance advantage? It sure looks like there is to me - Toyota extended the length of the front lip on the 2017s precisely for the reason the STi front lip exists: better aero.
3rd..."other people ran it at 2016 nats without issue" isn't a good defense to the PC unless they were protested and found to be compliant.
IMO these violate 14.2.F.2. They would be ok if they weren't in the STi section of the catalog or if they were available as a port install. I'd be less salty if they were available to me.
When Fenstermacher did the due diligence on the CS TRD parts he was happy to send all his documentation to the SEB for a tech bulletin because he was extremely confident they would be found legal (and they were). If you are equally convinced they are legal, you can request a tech bulletin as well and that will nip all protests in the bud. If you think there's a chance the SEB won't see things your way, then maybe they aren't legal after all. Edit: you can search previous Fastracks for previous tech bulletins as well, or search the monster STX thread. It may have been covered already.