New Fastrack out
No new Porsches in BS, but they move the Model 3 back from SS to BS, skipping AS in both directions. Seems strange.
I think the turbo-4 718s can compete in AS on courses where turbo-lag doesn't play a big role. I don't know enough about 991s to comment on AS competitiveness.
The 987.1 Cayman would be fun in CS, but I won't own an M96/97 car. The 987.2 non-S in CS would sorely tempt me, but I guess it's not going to happen, though it is no longer competitive in BS. But they put the Supra turbo-4cyl in CS? I wonder what it weighs. That might actually be a threat to the ND2.
I think the turbo-4 718s can compete in AS on courses where turbo-lag doesn't play a big role. I don't know enough about 991s to comment on AS competitiveness.
The 987.1 Cayman would be fun in CS, but I won't own an M96/97 car. The 987.2 non-S in CS would sorely tempt me, but I guess it's not going to happen, though it is no longer competitive in BS. But they put the Supra turbo-4cyl in CS? I wonder what it weighs. That might actually be a threat to the ND2.
Last edited by edfishjr; Feb 21, 2023 at 07:33 PM.
No new Porsches in BS, but they move the Model 3 back from SS to BS, skipping AS in both directions. Seems strange.
I think the turbo-4 718s can compete in AS on courses where turbo-lag doesn't play a big role. I don't know enough about 991s to comment on AS competitiveness.
The 987.1 Cayman would be fun in CS, but I won't own an M96/97 car. The 987.2 non-S in CS would sorely tempt me, but I guess it's not going to happen, though it is no longer competitive in BS. But they put the Supra turbo-4cyl in CS? I wonder what it weights. That might actually be a threat to the ND2.
I think the turbo-4 718s can compete in AS on courses where turbo-lag doesn't play a big role. I don't know enough about 991s to comment on AS competitiveness.
The 987.1 Cayman would be fun in CS, but I won't own an M96/97 car. The 987.2 non-S in CS would sorely tempt me, but I guess it's not going to happen, though it is no longer competitive in BS. But they put the Supra turbo-4cyl in CS? I wonder what it weights. That might actually be a threat to the ND2.
They also just decided to say that "the manufacturer doesn't classify a muffler as an emissions device" in regard to the GT4 muffler issue.... The whole complication is that the muffler was covered by the emissions warranty. Why not say that mufflers which serve no other purpose than noise emssions can be replaced in street class, rather than just making up an answer that is only half true?
Those people are so bad at what they do, it's not even worth writing a letter.
Last edited by Auto_Werks 3.6; Feb 21, 2023 at 01:18 PM.
Street Category
#33348 Clarity on rear muffler change allowance in Street Class Thank you for your letter. According to the manufacturer the Cayman GT4 muffler is not classified as an emissions control device. Therefore, it is legal to be replaced per section 13.10.C. Other exhaust components classified as as emissions control devices per the manufacturer may not be replaced regardless of their position in the exhaust system
#33348 Clarity on rear muffler change allowance in Street Class Thank you for your letter. According to the manufacturer the Cayman GT4 muffler is not classified as an emissions control device. Therefore, it is legal to be replaced per section 13.10.C. Other exhaust components classified as as emissions control devices per the manufacturer may not be replaced regardless of their position in the exhaust system
I'm pretty sure the thoughtlessness is deliberate, for the same reason they won't touch the 981. It probably wasn't completely an after thought
Congrats on your new car, by the way! hope to see you at an event this year!
Trending Topics
Thank you! I will be at the Champ Tour showing those C6Z's and (apparently) S and GTS 718's how to go fast in AS. I will say though, while I'm still breaking it in, the T feels phenomenal. Looking forward to racing it for sure!
No new Porsches in BS, but they move the Model 3 back from SS to BS, skipping AS in both directions. Seems strange.
I think the turbo-4 718s can compete in AS on courses where turbo-lag doesn't play a big role. I don't know enough about 991s to comment on AS competitiveness.
The 987.1 Cayman would be fun in CS, but I won't own an M96/97 car. The 987.2 non-S in CS would sorely tempt me, but I guess it's not going to happen, though it is no longer competitive in BS. But they put the Supra turbo-4cyl in CS? I wonder what it weighs. That might actually be a threat to the ND2.
I think the turbo-4 718s can compete in AS on courses where turbo-lag doesn't play a big role. I don't know enough about 991s to comment on AS competitiveness.
The 987.1 Cayman would be fun in CS, but I won't own an M96/97 car. The 987.2 non-S in CS would sorely tempt me, but I guess it's not going to happen, though it is no longer competitive in BS. But they put the Supra turbo-4cyl in CS? I wonder what it weighs. That might actually be a threat to the ND2.
They also just decided to say that "the manufacturer doesn't classify a muffler as an emissions device" in regard to the GT4 muffler issue.... The whole complication is that the muffler was covered by the emissions warranty. Why not say that mufflers which serve no other purpose than noise emssions can be replaced in street class, rather than just making up an answer that is only half true?
Those people are so bad at what they do, it's not even worth writing a letter.
Bob L
Last edited by Formulabob; Feb 21, 2023 at 10:04 PM. Reason: Missing “policy decision”
Muffler and OAP are emissions devices in California and the 13 states that follow Cali rules. In the other 36 states, neither the muffler nor OAPs are covered by emissions warranty. So, do we follow Cali rules or Federal rules? My letter to the SEB on this (33372) in November 2022 requesting a policy decision apparently still is being reviewed/considered.
Bob L
Bob L
That sounds about right. I'm not planning on buying a GT4, but it seems like common sense that they should be able to change out a muffler. I messaged with Ron Bauer yesterday, and if I'm understanding correctly he wants to leverage this situation to have the SEB allow more emissions modifications. I'm not sure that makes sense to me, but it would be better than the SEB publishing a comment that is generally known to be untrue instead of doing their job to address actual issues.




