FIA App K regulations - 01-01-2012

[Mike Bell]

Allowed if the car type in question was homologated to use them in period, is how it was told to me by an MSA Inspector / Scrutineer. FIA clamped down on it during this year, and caused a few panics with HTP applications and renewals.....

[morninggents]

Originally Posted by Mike Bell

Allowed if the car type in question was homologated to use them in period, is how it was told to me by an MSA Inspector / Scrutineer.

That's how it should be.

[Robert Farrell]

Looking at the actual Homologation forms (Not HTP`s) of
the two cars I am currently researching simply state.
Shock Absorbers:- Telescopic-Hydraulic.
Springs :- Coil
No mention of adjustable/fixed spring platforms
No mention of adjustable/fixed hydraulics.Bump/Rebound rates
No mention of Shock absorber mounting types. Bushes or Rose joints etc.

Has anyone seen homologation forms,(Not HTP`s) for what were originally road cars, actually specifying adjustable shock absorbers, adjustable spring mounts or both.

The logic of a prohibiting adjustable spring mounts yet allowing non-homologated adjustable damping rates on the same piece of equipment defeats me.

[Simon Hadfield]

For that information you have to go to Appendix J of the period to see what was allowed, and then what was actually done under those regulations in period. As a rule of thumb unless it was stated you could do it you cannot today.
In Appendix J for most of Period F for example make and type of shock absorber was free within the given provisos - mainly that the method of operation stays the same - so a telescopic hydraulic shock absorber could have been replaced by ANY telescopic shock absorber from that period. That is probably the biggest issue, period freedoms do not give total freedom today, only what was legally and provably done under those freedoms in period.
Appendix J always defines how a car could be run/modified/used beyond the actual homologation document. Appendix K today tries to summarise these period regulations and refines those concepts for modern use - in safety issues for example.

[Simon Hadfield]

There is, or maybe should be, a discussion to be had about adjustable dampers, anti roll bars etc. If you are very wealthy you can have a preparer build lots of struts say, or make lots of anti roll bars, buy lots of springs, test for days and have a dry set up, moist set up and one for the wet which a crew can change, fit or modify as desired. If you are a weekend racer with the missus (or your partner) as crew is there an argument that having one part that is easily and quickly changed a more sensible way?
However the counter argument is that having a quickly adjustable set up allows the professional crew to "optimise" that set up in a short practice.
I can see both sides of the argument, I am not sure if there is a "right answer", which is why the period way is what is followed first.

[Tel 911S]

Originally Posted by Robert Farrell

Looking at the actual Homologation forms (Not HTP`s) of
the two cars I am currently researching simply state.
Shock Absorbers:- Telescopic-Hydraulic.
Springs :- Coil
No mention of adjustable/fixed spring platforms
No mention of adjustable/fixed hydraulics.Bump/Rebound rates
No mention of Shock absorber mounting types. Bushes or Rose joints etc.

Has anyone seen homologation forms,(Not HTP`s) for what were originally road cars, actually specifying adjustable shock absorbers, adjustable spring mounts or both.

The logic of a prohibiting adjustable spring mounts yet allowing non-homologated adjustable damping rates on the same piece of equipment defeats me.

Hardly any , [ & I have a lot ] Homologation papers show the actual shock absorber , but as you say , just mention the type of action , [ E.G. lever or telescopic etc ].
But app J of period would say what could be done . Like replacing standard ones with uprated / gas type or whatever .And usually said that , provided original mounting points were used , the type of unit was free .

So the normal rules have been that , provided that type of unit was available in that period , then it could be used .

When it comes to adjustable platforms , it becomes complicated .There is no doubt that they could have had adjustable platforms back in the day , but has been very difficult to prove " use in period ".
So I am guessing that this new ruling in App K is to take the decision away from the foibles of individual scrutineers .

[Robert Farrell]

[QUOTE=Simon Hadfield; If you are very wealthy you can have a preparer build lots of struts say, or make lots of anti roll bars, buy lots of springs, test for days and have a dry set up, moist set up and one for the wet which a crew can change, fit or modify as desired. TE]

There is a sad inevitability about Simons point.

If the integrity of FIA cars is to be paramount at all costs then worrying about adjustable spring saddles is the FIA equivalent to re-arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic as it sank.

A cynical person might think the "Clamp Down" on adjustable spring heights has come about simply because it is easy to police.

[terence]

Said person might even say that as long as its painted in "FIA Black", you can even fit bump and rebound adjustable shockers..Were they actually invented 'back in the day,.

[Tel 911S]

Originally Posted by terence

Said person might even say that as long as its painted in "FIA Black", you can even fit bump and rebound adjustable shockers..Were they actually invented 'back in the day,.

https://www.vintagecarparts.co.uk/pa...shock-absorber

Link to early type adjustable shock absorber .
But there were adjustable hydraulic units about in the 60s [ if not before ]. 2
way adjustables not long after .But the currant 3 way adjustable type are relatively new , so definitely not correct for anything classed as Historic .

[terence]

Yes, adjustables were available early 60s.Fitted to most BMC works cars.
There was also the double valved lever arm available as fitted to the A55 I think. (Hens teath doesnt come close though).
As you say, three way however were a different story.

[zefarelly]

I used to have a pair of original 60's Armstrong adjustable dampers on one of my Cortinas. One knob soft/hard.

I should have kept them they were probably better than what I have on there now!

[Peter Mallett]

My Rover has original works dampers. They are non adjustable for bump, rebound etc. I think you can adjust them for ride height.

[Duddha]

Originally Posted by zefarelly

I used to have a pair of original 60's Armstrong adjustable dampers on one of my Cortinas. One knob soft/hard.

I should have kept them they were probably better than what I have on there now!

That would correspond to the period. Cobras were first fitted with adjustable armstrong and then the Koni as an option. Some are on the market but do not know the price...

[Duddha]

Following the fact that all historic content and regulations were hard to find on the FIA Website, a dedicated area has been created and is now working. Please find it here - http://www.fia.com/historic

If looking for all Historic Regulations please look here - http://www.fia.com/historic-regulations

[Tel 911S]

Originally Posted by Duddha

Following the fact that all historic content and regulations were hard to find on the FIA Website, a dedicated area has been created and is now working. Please find it here - http://www.fia.com/historic

If looking for all Historic Regulations please look here - http://www.fia.com/historic-regulations

Thanks for posting that . It should make finding the pages easier .

I hope there are no more changes for 2016 , there has been 2 new lots of App K already in 2015.

[Duddha]

Originally Posted by Tel 911S

Thanks for posting that . It should make finding the pages easier .

I hope there are no more changes for 2016 , there has been 2 new lots of App K already in 2015.

No problem, on updates they are achieved all year and Appendix K is updated according to them - precision/clarification - unless they are fundamental changes which then are introduced on the next year version.

[Duddha]

Latest update here - http://www.fia.com/file/39204/download?token=-5yfhq3p

[Duddha]

Latest update to FIA Appendix K, published and valid from 24.06.2016

http://www.fia.com/file/43859/downlo...token=zwGbASNj

[Duddha]

Latest update:

2016 Appendix K - Technical regulations for historic cars - published on 29.09.2016 - application from: 29.09.2016

Please note, under Art. 7.3.6 to Appendix K and relevant classification update made under Appendix I to Appendix K that we have started the process for recognition of so-called Group 1 "1/2" or "+".

But as detailed under Art. 7.3.6, these cars are not to be recognised as whatever the applicant wishes to have to suit its own need of "modern historic performance", these cars will have to be submitted on the basis that:

Only modifications explicitly authorised in the period regulations and legally used on the model concerned are applicable. Proof of period specification will be required for all non-homologated components and/or modifications.

Therefore, sort your regulations out and period proofs, regulations being relevant for a particular year and also the fact that only "THE" national Championship will be recognised.

[Duddha]

2017 Version as from today :

http://www.fia.com/appendix-k-techni...ation-01012017

[zefarelly]

Louis, if horizontal sliding windows can replace vertical openers, and mechanisms be removed ( to save weight) would window still need to be openable ? ie you cannot just put a fixed window in a Cortina and throw everything away ?

[Duddha]

Originally Posted by zefarelly

Louis, if horizontal sliding windows can replace vertical openers, and mechanisms be removed ( to save weight) would window still need to be openable ? ie you cannot just put a fixed window in a Cortina and throw everything away ?

If refering to 7.3.7, a horizontal sliding window may replace a vertical sliding window but it needs to have a opening and way to open yes.

[zefarelly]

Hopefully that excludes those horrible fixed windows with a mini slider found in some rally cars!

[Gerard C]

Did I see a new version dated march 10th 2017? If I'm right, the window mechanism can be thrown away (not too far not too strong!) as to Grp2, 4 and 5.

[Duddha]

Originally Posted by Gerard C

Did I see a new version dated march 10th 2017? If I'm right, the window mechanism can be thrown away (not too far not too strong!) as to Grp2, 4 and 5.

There is even a version published on 7th of April 2017, but the window mechanism may only be removed on Competition Touring Cars and Grand Touring Cars from Period E onwards and if original windows are removed. So keep it in Group 1 and Group 3.