Is this legal?

[fredjohnston]

looks bogus to me. If I was from that area I would protest.

[Notch1320]

And the "rule book" says what about anit roll bars???

[JHeath]

ahhh...I think it says nothing....traction devices are "supposed " to be bolt on, anti-roll bar is not a traction bar, I've looked under many stockers,lots have them and all were welded in.

[Notch1320]

^^^ Yep! Mine is welded in.

[Duane Eiskant II]

You can tack weld the anti roll bar in place and bolt it, but i was told you could not completely weld the unit in. Thats the way mine is put it, works great and never had a issue.

[Mark Yacavone]

Originally Posted by stk4178

Considering that wolfe sells a weld-in package for mustangs. I would say its legal for stock

I would say it's NOT.

[Billy Nees]

Originally Posted by JHeath

ahhh...I think it says nothing....traction devices are "supposed " to be bolt on, anti-roll bar is not a traction bar, I've looked under many stockers,lots have them and all were welded in.

OK, if it's not a traction device then what exactly is it? Why do you have it in the car?
To answer the question, no it's not legal but all of the late model F bodies that I've looked at have them welded in and the particular kit in that article is meant to be welded in.
NHRA should spend some time looking under cars instead of just looking under hoods.

[Mark Yacavone]

NHRA should spend some time looking under cars instead of just looking under hoods.

I WOULD agree with this.


Years ago, the first time I tore the left lower trailing arm bracket off a full size Chevy frame, I had to do something to fix it...or park the car.
That didn't seem like a good option at the time, so I welded the bracket back on and added a couple of gussets to it. No one ever said anything about or most likely ,even noticed it.
Was it technically legal? Probably not.
If you are allowed to weld braces and brackets to suspension mounts, then it should be mentioned in the rule book.
Just because this deal is out there, doesn't make it legal.
Look how long the first gen. weebie jeebie bars were out there before someone in tech figured out they were moving the whole lower pivot to a non OEM location.

[Aubrey N Bruneau]

As I understand it, the purpose of a rear "anti-roll" bar, is to help resist the tendency for the entire car to twist or "tilt" to the right on launch, and in the lower gears ? Right ?
In extreme cases ( and I think we've all seen those videos of the early 60's Chevy nostalgia match racing cars that almost lay on their right side on launch ), this CAN'T ber safe.
Solution ?
More weight jacking to the RR spring ? ( "side effect".. no pun intended... car goes back to tilted left at high speed )
WAY stiffer springs ? ( to what end ? ... till the rear suspension doesn't move ? )
Or... install a simple device that manufacturers have used to control body roll, since the late 1930's ?
Cars with rear coil springs, will inherently be less resistant to the body rolling to one side... mostly due the fact that the springs are usually located much more inboard than a leaf spring car.
Having seen some of these "twisted" launches... I think cars with the problem should be required to control it.

As with anything. there's trade-offs.
A rear ant-roll bar, without a front anti-roll bar ( most of us don't use a front one ), creates a car with dramatic over-steer characteristics. Add to that, our low pressure rear tires, and you have someing that you better not try and make sudden moves of the steering wheel at high speed !

To me, if it's not changing the suspension geometry in any way, and you're not welding in a bunch of crap... a rear anti-roll bar should be permitted, and specified as such.
and no... I don't have one.

[Jeff Swanson]

I went to a lot of trouble back in the day to put an anti-roll bar in my car and make it 100% bolt in. Worked like a champ but definitely would have been easier to weld it in.