PV and Added Equipment - NCRS Discussion Boards

PV and Added Equipment

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Joe C.
    Expired
    • August 31, 1999
    • 4598

    PV and Added Equipment

    The 84-89 Ops Manual states, on page 11, that: ".......evidence of the addition or removal of any option, such as radio, heater, air conditioning of AIR equipment is unacceptable"

    Would a dealer installed "Maxi Lock" (starter kill/hood lock) disqualify a car. My guess is that it would not, but you can never be too careful.........it's a long drive from central Jersey to Boston! It won't take long to remove, but I'd rather not.

    Thanks in advance.

    Joe
  • Rick A.
    Extremely Frequent Poster
    • July 31, 2002
    • 2147

    #2
    Re: PV and Added Equipment

    not sure what you mean by "disqualify" - but, if you are asking if dealer installed options will "probably" garner a deduction of points - YES
    Rick Aleshire
    2016 Ebony C7R Z06 "ROSA"

    Comment

    • Joe C.
      Expired
      • August 31, 1999
      • 4598

      #3
      I Just Got the Straight Dope

      Rick,

      Since PV testing is either "go"/"no-go" any single item will cause a failure. Anyway, I just now learned that, in my case, the lock will not cause a failure because it does not affect the ORIGINAL operating characteristics of the car, in any way.

      Joe

      Comment

      • Jack H.
        Extremely Frequent Poster
        • April 1, 1990
        • 9906

        #4
        That should be covered by...

        Section 2, Rule 25, of the NCRS Judging Reference Manual:

        "The following are allowed with no scoring deduction:

        (A) Standard seat belt installation on 1953 through 1957 models.

        (B) State of Federally required safety equipment, State required current inspection and/or registration sticker.

        (C) Very inconspicuous function non-factory alarm system."

        Note the rule does not distinguish between Flight and PV scoring and the purpose of your Maxi Lock system is anti-theft which part C of the rule addresses... The National Team Leader is your best source for a difinitive ruling here, but I'd be prone to viewing the extra item as a non-factory alarm system.

        The main purpose of prohibiting vehicle alteration for PV is to prevent cars from getting a performance enhancement over factory stock for the verification test. In your case, you've got something else to break/malfunction and hurt your chances at passing the test.

        The

        Comment

        • Rick A.
          Extremely Frequent Poster
          • July 31, 2002
          • 2147

          #5
          Re: I Just Got the Straight Dope

          Joe,

          my bad....DOH....just now realized when I read your current post it was PV question! and, yes you are correct PV is a pass/fail if you will, and you can correct one failure, and then it is a complete bust! sorry, about my DOH......
          Rick Aleshire
          2016 Ebony C7R Z06 "ROSA"

          Comment

          Working...

          Debug Information

          Searching...Please wait.
          An unexpected error was returned: 'Your submission could not be processed because you have logged in since the previous page was loaded.

          Please push the back button and reload the previous window.'
          An unexpected error was returned: 'Your submission could not be processed because the token has expired.

          Please push the back button and reload the previous window.'
          An internal error has occurred and the module cannot be displayed.
          There are no results that meet this criteria.
          Search Result for "|||"