# MECA 2013 rules



## KP

Link will be active by the 1st.

http://www.mecacaraudio.com/2013rulebook.pdf


----------



## ErinH

Thanks, Kirk.

I stickied this thread... at least for the year. That way people will have a chance to see it and hopefully not be surprised by anything at the end of the year.


----------



## Darth SQ

Thanks very much for the link.
Any word on the release of the new MECA Competition cd?


Bret
PPI-ART COLLECTOR


----------



## chefhow

Thanks for the link, but can you give us any clues as to what the changes to Modex and Extreme are, some of us are trying to get builds done.


----------



## KP

I have not seen the SQ rules at all so no clue. I am not on any of the committee's. I just do the yearly link and watch the squabbing.  No word of the CD that I have heard either.

Privileged to be stickied by bikini.


----------



## ErinH

I'll sticky you anytime you want, Kirk.


----------



## Darth SQ

bikinpunk said:


> I'll sticky you anytime you want, Kirk.


That's just f'd up. :surprised:


Bret
PPI-ART COLLECTOR


----------



## chefhow

AcuraTLSQ said:


> I have not seen the SQ rules at all so no clue. I am not on any of the committee's.
> 
> Privileged to be stickied by bikini.


Wasnt sure so I thought I'd ask.


That is sig worthy material right there...


----------



## darrenforeal

link still no worky


----------



## Thumper26

...link still isn't working


----------



## beef316

Thumper26 said:


> ...link still isn't working


:banghead:

Sent from my SCH-I510 using Tapatalk 2


----------



## audionutz

Rulez arent "finalized" yet bois....very, very soon tho.


----------



## chefhow

As I stated in another thread the rules will be done on Sunday according to the Commish


----------



## beef316

Zzzzzzzzzz

Sent from my SCH-I510 using Tapatalk 2


----------



## SQHemi

beef316 said:


> Zzzzzzzzzz
> 
> Sent from my SCH-I510 using Tapatalk 2


Agreed. I hate being in limbo. Especially when you have cars in both classes being affected by the changes.


----------



## robert_wrath

SQHemi said:


> Agreed. I hate being in limbo. Especially when you have cars in both classes being affected by the changes.


That must really suck.


----------



## bigbubba

spyders03 said:


> Any word on the Meca CD yet?
> 
> Also, totally a noob question, but is there any kind of amateur class like IASCA, or is it all just class dependent? Doesn't really matter either way, but if there is no Amateur class, would I really gain anything by waiting to compete?


 I was told it will be ready by SBN in March.


----------



## spyders03

bigbubba said:


> I was told it will be ready by SBN in March.


So, one would assume are they using the same CD as 2012 until then?


----------



## BigRed

what about the 7 shows that already have taken place this year? do they get the points in their class even thought the rules might re-classify them?

this is the problem with not having the rules done before the season starts 

the dash rule i think will ultimately be labeled "the steve cook rule" lol


----------



## bigbubba

spyders03 said:


> So, one would assume are they using the same CD as 2012 until then?


That would be my guess.


----------



## ErinH

thread cleaned up now that the rules gaffe has been resolved.


----------



## BigRed

Straight ninja


----------



## ErinH

BigRed said:


> Straight ninja




wachaaaaaaaaahhhh!!!!!!


----------



## BigRed

U deleted my post about how people are going to be scored if the new rules change their class. That's still a valid question


----------



## pionkej

Rules cleared up that I'll be joining the Extreme ranks this year. I hope the rebuild pays off!

"Anything goes"


----------



## ErinH

BigRed said:


> U deleted my post about how people are going to be scored if the new rules change their class. That's still a valid question


My bad man. There was like 30 posts and it was a goof. No need to be so touchy.


----------



## decibelle

Can anyone else not access it? Or is it just me?


----------



## strakele

So what is considered a "raised floor enclosure"?


----------



## beef316

So I have cut my kick panel plastic. Guess I am out of modified street. :banghead:

Sent from my SCH-I510 using Tapatalk 2


----------



## chefhow

What is the determining factor for line of sight in regards to the a pillar builds?


----------



## Matt R

strakele said:


> So what is considered a "raised floor enclosure"?


The majority of the rules and most all changes refer to speakers infront of the b pillar. 

A raised floor enclosure is just that, If the floor is built up or "raised" to put a speaker under your feet that is against the rules for that class.


----------



## Matt R

beef316 said:


> So I have cut my kick panel plastic. Guess I am out of modified street. :banghead:
> 
> Sent from my SCH-I510 using Tapatalk 2


Not true, cutting of plastic is not allowed in general but it says "permitted items excluded". The addition of kick panels is in the permitted column and can be integrated into the factory panels.


----------



## Matt R

chefhow said:


> What is the determining factor for line of sight in regards to the a pillar builds?


This wording is intended to have a bit of discression and verification judges can make a determination. I think a bit of common sense is the key. 

We have basically determined a 4 inch driver is as big as modified can go on the dash/pillar area. If someone shows up with 5-6-7 inch drivers in the pillars, that would obviously be above the modified rules. 

I havent seen too many pillars with anything bigger than a 4 inch driver that looked anywhere near integraded into the car. I personally wouldnt do a driver bigger than a 3 in a pillar.


----------



## Mic10is

Matt R said:


> This wording is intended to have a bit of discression and verification judges can make a determination. I think a bit of common sense is the key.
> 
> We have basically determined a 4 inch driver is as big as modified can go on the dash/pillar area. If someone shows up with 5-6-7 inch drivers in the pillars, that would obviously be above the modified rules.
> 
> I havent seen too many pillars with anything bigger than a 4 inch driver that looked anywhere near integraded into the car. I personally wouldnt do a driver bigger than a 3 in a pillar.


what about doing something similar to EMMA
I cant find the exact rule but basically they put a piece of paper that is 2-3" long at the edge of the windshield by the pod.
if when viewed from the driver seat, looking forward, the judge cannot see the inside edge of the pillar, then the pod is not allowed or considered to be in the line of sight


----------



## chefhow

Matt R said:


> This wording is intended to have a bit of discression and verification judges can make a determination. I think a bit of common sense is the key.
> 
> We have basically determined a 4 inch driver is as big as modified can go on the dash/pillar area. If someone shows up with 5-6-7 inch drivers in the pillars, that would obviously be above the modified rules.
> 
> I havent seen too many pillars with anything bigger than a 4 inch driver that looked anywhere near integraded into the car. I personally wouldnt do a driver bigger than a 3 in a pillar.


Thanks Matt, but I do have a question.
If we have deemed an install ok for use in a certain class based on what you just said since it is discretionary, and we get to finals and a judge there says no , what happens then. I understand its hard to write a hard black and white rule and draw a line but at some point my idea of what is allowed may not coincide with somebody else's and the only person who suffers is the competitor. I personally think, IMHO, there needs to be a more defining rule with actual criteria for what line of sight means and what can and can't be done.


----------



## DAT

I got it, now to see the changes.


----------



## chefhow

Go to the MECA website Dave, it's up there


----------



## DAT

chefhow said:


> Go to the MECA website Dave, it's up there



Thanks Howard



So anyone moving to a different class? John [ *pionkej *]you getting bumped to Extreme?


----------



## ErinH

DAT said:


> Thanks Howard
> 
> 
> 
> So anyone moving to a different class? John [ *pionkej *]you getting bumped to Extreme?


I'll speak for John.... it looks that way. My concerns about getting bumped look to have been negated with the updated rules. Don't know about anyone else, though.


I think the rules are actually pretty well laid out (not saying there isn't some gray area as Matt already mentioned) but they seem to do a pretty good job of splitting up classes in ways that make sense.


----------



## Melodic Acoustic

bikinpunk said:


> I'll speak for John.... it looks that way. My concerns about getting bumped look to have been negated with the updated rules. Don't know about anyone else, though.
> 
> 
> I think the rules are actually pretty well laid out (not saying there isn't some gray area as Matt already mentioned) but they seem to do a pretty good job of splitting up classes in ways that make sense.


I have to agree Erin they are pretty clear now. Some other changes was made from the first version other then the re-wording of the pods on the dash and A-pillars that was a little un-clear at first. But its pretty straight forward now. There will always be some grey area here and there, but I do not see much that can not understood, if your not over thinking it. 

But as a long as a lot of us have been doing this, we know not everyone will be happy with change. If you make one group happy the next will be a little uneasy. I'm was just happy to see Steve and the panel of rule makers at MECA make changes so fast to the rules. Impressive!!


----------



## ErinH

Stop agreeing with me, Mark! Gosh!


----------



## Melodic Acoustic

bikinpunk said:


> Stop agreeing with me, Mark! Gosh!


Ya i know, I getting a little sick on my stomach!!

but,

When your right your right.


----------



## ErinH

Lol. Your face makes me sick! Fighting words!


----------



## Darth SQ

bikinpunk said:


> Lol. Your face makes me sick! Fighting words!


I think Mark owns a horse too. 


Bret
PPI-ART COLLECTOR


----------



## pionkej

DAT said:


> Thanks Howard
> 
> 
> 
> So anyone moving to a different class? John [ *pionkej *]you getting bumped to Extreme?


Yep, I'll be in Extreme. What's ironic is that I made some changes after Finals to my layout. If I'd kept my midrange pods...I'd have been moved to Extreme this season (based on size). Getting rid of them and changing things up STILL put me in those "not allowed" areas that moved me up to Extreme.

Needless to say, changes or not, I'd have been in Extreme this year based on the rules. So now I'm going to try and roll with it and take advantage of "Anything Goes".


----------



## decibelle

pionkej said:


> So now I'm going to try and roll with it and take advantage of "Anything Goes".


That's the spirit. No fear! Time to make even better use of all the space in the Murano. 

Also one less guy I have to worry about now


----------



## DAT

pionkej said:


> Yep, I'll be in Extreme. What's ironic is that I made some changes after Finals to my layout. If I'd kept my midrange pods...I'd have been moved to Extreme this season (based on size). Getting rid of them and changing things up STILL put me in those "not allowed" areas that moved me up to Extreme.
> 
> Needless to say, changes or not, I'd have been in Extreme this year based on the rules. So now I'm going to try and roll with it and take advantage of "Anything Goes".




Great welcome to Extreme... looks like we got Steve Cook this year also... 

Erin you wanna come too? Just do it.


----------



## Matt R

chefhow said:


> Thanks Matt, but I do have a question.
> If we have deemed an install ok for use in a certain class based on what you just said since it is discretionary, and we get to finals and a judge there says no , what happens then. I understand its hard to write a hard black and white rule and draw a line but at some point my idea of what is allowed may not coincide with somebody else's and the only person who suffers is the competitor. I personally think, IMHO, there needs to be a more defining rule with actual criteria for what line of sight means and what can and can't be done.


If your vehicle is built to the other criteria of the class (pod size, build out pillars, speaker size restrictions, etc) that should clearly define the class. We just dont want anyone to show up with something rediculously large that is unsafe to drive that vehicle.

We dont want to take any of the creativity out of speaker placement, direction, etc. we just wanted to set the overall size restrictions. If we make it too specific, everyone would end up bringing the same exact setup. We dont want to tell competitors how to install their speakers, just dont go any larger than (insert rule here).


----------



## Mic10is

Matt R said:


> If your vehicle is built to the other criteria of the class (pod size, build out pillars, speaker size restrictions, etc) that should clearly define the class. We just dont want anyone to show up with something rediculously large that is unsafe to drive that vehicle.
> 
> We dont want to take any of the creativity out of speaker placement, direction, etc. we just wanted to set the overall size restrictions. If we make it too specific, everyone would end up bringing the same exact setup. We dont want to tell competitors how to install their speakers, just dont go any larger than (insert rule here).


I think Howard's question is more to the line of--if a competitors goes to multiple events during a year, even in different areas, and is verified to be in a certain class based on how the rules are written and then shows up at Finals and has another judge flag him--is this something that can be fairly addressed by being more specific with the rules to avoid this situation.


----------



## highly

So about 'Anything Goes' in Extreme...

If I build my main stage in the back of the car then spin the seats around 180 degrees on a lazy susan and cover the rear and side glass with 2" eggcrate foam...

I think some more concise definition of the general parameters under which 'anything goes' is framed might be prudent. Otherwise if anything goes actually MEANS *anything goes* it's going to be a very interesting year!

-Todd


----------



## Mic10is

highly said:


> So about 'Anything Goes' in Extreme...
> 
> If I build my main stage in the back of the car then spin the seats around 180 degrees on a lazy susan and cover the rear and side glass with 2" eggcrate foam...
> 
> I think some more concise definition of the general parameters under which 'anything goes' is framed might be prudent. Otherwise if anything goes actually MEANS *anything goes* it's going to be a very interesting year!
> 
> -Todd


If it really is anything goes---Im changing classes...and cars


----------



## AccordUno

Matt, or anyone for that matter. Curious about the


> Obscuring line-of-sight through any window glass in
> front of the B-pillars (excluding speaker pods, window
> tint, and exterior coverings used for judging).


 Statement, we are talking about the B-pillars that are usually around the ear right? So would something place me in the extreme class, as well?

That's a 4" speaker.


----------



## tnbubba

2 fn many rules..


----------



## Matt R

Mic10is said:


> I think Howard's question is more to the line of--if a competitors goes to multiple events during a year, even in different areas, and is verified to be in a certain class based on how the rules are written and then shows up at Finals and has another judge flag him--is this something that can be fairly addressed by being more specific with the rules to avoid this situation.


I think if there is a particular situation where you cant find the answers about a specific car in the rules, the varification judge can easily take a pic and ask the R&E committe. 



highly said:


> So about 'Anything Goes' in Extreme...
> 
> If I build my main stage in the back of the car then spin the seats around 180 degrees on a lazy susan and cover the rear and side glass with 2" eggcrate foam...
> 
> I think some more concise definition of the general parameters under which 'anything goes' is framed might be prudent. Otherwise if anything goes actually MEANS *anything goes* it's going to be a very interesting year!
> 
> -Todd


Hi Todd, in the requirements section it states "the care must run and be driveable from the driver seat" I dont see any problem with a swivel seat. We really want extreme to be a class that we dont restrict at all. It is written that way to allow competitors to use thier imagination. 



AccordUno said:


> Matt, or anyone for that matter. Curious about the Statement, we are talking about the B-pillars that are usually around the ear right? So would something place me in the extreme class, as well?
> 
> That's a 4" speaker.


What up Jose, That pillar install would fall into the modified class. If it was a bigger driver (over4"), that would put you up into modex. Nice job on that by the way.



tnbubba said:


> 2 fn many rules..


Ahh come on!!!


----------



## AccordUno

What's the deal with Window tinting being permitted, dd ya have spell that out. I can't seem to figure out where there's an advantage with that..


----------



## michaelsil1

We have some mad people here in So. California being moved out of Modified.


----------



## darrenforeal

A few of things I'd like to know.

1) If you have stock speakers in the dash and you make low profile pods that remain having a factory like appearance, but put 3 inch drivers in. Will this bump you out of mod street?

2) If you have factory kick panels, but cut some plastic to fit 6.5 inch drivers does this bump you out of mod street?


AND


1) If you have stock dash speakers but you cut some plastic to get 4 inch drivers to fit does that knock you out of modified? What about a 5.25inch speaker flush mounted?

2) If you have stock dash speakers but you install dash pods in the factory location with 5.25 inch speakers does it knock you out of modified?





michaelsil1 said:


> We have some mad people here in So. California being moved out of Modified.


yep, looks like David will be out of modified, and maybe John, yeah? I am sure both are THRILLED about that. lol


----------



## tintbox

At the end of day it just music. Enjoy it.


----------



## DAT

I'm going to Mod street... Extreme too easy 

Just kidding


----------



## tintbox

Extreme is going to be stacked to say the least.


----------



## MacLeod

I was planning on going back to Street class this year since I suck at installing and creativity and it looks like nothing has really changed that much, or for any class really. Theyve clarified a bunch of things and thats always good. 

And I like the way the new format is laid out. PERMITTED and NOT PERMITTED. Makes it much easier to figure out whats allowed. 

Sucks though that theyre still ripping you off with turn off pops. I think it sucks you get penalized for something thats not in any way your fault. My new $700 RF amp has a turn off pop just like my old $550 Polk amp I used before that and the $350 Crossfire before that. Guess Ill continue to lose a point or more every show. On the bright side, I have a built in excuse for when I lose at finals.....again.


----------



## BigRed

Darren,

Modified only allows a 4" driver on the dash max. so anything larger gets bumped up.

enclosure at the face can only be 4.5 inches wide or tall from the dash or you get bumped out of modified. same goes for modex.


----------



## darrenforeal

BigRed said:


> Darren,
> 
> Modified only allows a 4" driver on the dash max. so anything larger gets bumped up.
> 
> enclosure at the face can only be 4.5 inches wide or tall from the dash or you get bumped out of modified. same goes for modex.


thanks Jim. Some people are going to be pissed. lol


I guess I am curious about what I said in mod street too


----------



## Matt R

michaelsil1 said:


> We have some mad people here in So. California being moved out of Modified.


Why? Modified barely changed at all. We just defined what was meant by dash pods.



darrenforeal said:


> A few of things I'd like to know.
> 
> 1) If you have stock speakers in the dash and you make low profile pods that remain having a factory like appearance, but put 3 inch drivers in. Will this bump you out of mod street?
> 
> Factory locations are allowed, cutting the plastic below the grill is ok. If you have a "pod above the dash" that is a modified class car.
> 
> 2) If you have factory kick panels, but cut some plastic to fit 6.5 inch drivers does this bump you out of mod street?
> 
> No. You are allowed to cut plastic in the kicks but not metal. The rule states no cutting of plastic or metal (permitted items are excluded}The kicks fall into the permitted column. We may need to make a clarification change to specify that.
> 
> 
> AND
> 
> 
> 1) If you have stock dash speakers but you cut some plastic to get 4 inch drivers to fit does that knock you out of modified? What about a 5.25inch speaker flush mounted?
> 
> Part 1, it depends on where you cut the plastic, if you cut below the dash thats fine, If you cut above the dash thats modex . Part 2 of this question, If the 5.25 is mounted in a factory location, thats fine for modified.
> 
> 2) If you have stock dash speakers but you install dash pods in the factory location with 5.25 inch speakers does it knock you out of modified?
> 
> Yes, the only way to use anything bigger than a 4 inch driver in modified is to use a factory location


----------



## darrenforeal

Matt R said:


> Why? Modified barely changed at all. We just defined what was meant by dash pods.
> 
> 
> 
> darrenforeal said:
> 
> 
> 
> A few of things I'd like to know.
> 
> 1) If you have stock speakers in the dash and you make low profile pods that remain having a factory like appearance, but put 3 inch drivers in. Will this bump you out of mod street?
> 
> Factory locations are allowed, cutting the plastic below the grill is ok. If you have a "pod above the dash" that is a modified class car.
> 
> 2) If you have factory kick panels, but cut some plastic to fit 6.5 inch drivers does this bump you out of mod street?
> 
> No. You are allowed to cut plastic in the kicks but not metal. The rule states no cutting of plastic or metal (permitted items are excluded}The kicks fall into the permitted column. We may need to make a clarification change to specify that.
> 
> 
> AND
> 
> 
> 1) If you have stock dash speakers but you cut some plastic to get 4 inch drivers to fit does that knock you out of modified? What about a 5.25inch speaker flush mounted?
> 
> Part 1, it depends on where you cut the plastic, if you cut below the dash thats fine, If you cut above the dash thats modex . Part 2 of this question, If the 5.25 is mounted in a factory location, thats fine for modified.
> 
> 2) If you have stock dash speakers but you install dash pods in the factory location with 5.25 inch speakers does it knock you out of modified?
> 
> Yes, the only way to use anything bigger than a 4 inch driver in modified is to use a factory location
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks. What do you mean by cutting below the dash vs. cutting above it? Also, what if the speaker in the dash is smaller? Can you put 5.25 in there if in the same location as OEM, but just have the hole modified?
Click to expand...


----------



## Genxx

Not to many changes IMO. All three of my vehicles are still in the same classes. I like the new rule book and layout.


----------



## Black05Hemi

Matt R said:


> Why? Modified barely changed at all. We just defined what was meant by dash pods


You disqualified my truck from Modified, which has won Cali State Finals three straight years. You disqualified John Fisher's Toyota 4-Runner, because his pods don't meet the stated sizing. And, now he has to redo his front stage. Again! And, unless i'm reading the rules wrong, my Jeep now has to go from ModEx to Extreme, because the sub enclosure sits underneath the vehicle in the back, where the spare tire use to be. Which is ridiculous. I thought it was bad enough the car had to go to ModEx, i'm not putting that car in Extreme.

It makes no sense to put these rules into place now, after people have worked over the winter to get their cars prepared for competition this year. I strongly disagree with the way this was handled. And, if I didn't have team commitments, I probably wouldn't even compete in Meca anymore. As it stands, I may go to one show this year. State Finals. I was actually thinking about taking over the promoting in So Cal too. Not anymore.


----------



## Black05Hemi

Upon reading the rules again, my truck was in the gray area for Modified last year. But, the way the rules are spelled out this year, there is no doubt, it's in ModEx. So, I don't have a huge problem with that, since it was borderline anyway.

But, changing the rules in ModEx...2012 "Enclosures may be externally mounted"...2013 "External speaker enclosures not permitted" puts my Jeep in Extreme. Not happening.


----------



## AccordUno

Matt, I can't take credit for that work. I'm still in the design/ building phase of the sub enclosure and amp rack, until those are in nothing is getting done in the pillars (avoiding the same mistake I did with the Accord).. 

The class criteria are interesting (Mod/Mod Street/ModEx) I could possibly build my truck to fit Mod, but might be kinda borderline..


----------



## highly

Matt R said:


> I think if there is a particular situation where you cant find the answers about a specific car in the rules, the varification judge can easily take a pic and ask the R&E committe.
> 
> 
> 
> Hi Todd, in the requirements section it states "the care must run and be driveable from the driver seat" I dont see any problem with a swivel seat. We really want extreme to be a class that we dont restrict at all. It is written that way to allow competitors to use thier imagination.


Well, that shut ME up! Thanks, Matt. It IS going to be an interesting year after all!

-Todd


----------



## BigRed

I'm coming with a custom motorhome bishes


----------



## highly

So how many L8s are you going to stuff in the floor of THAT?!


----------



## Matt R

darrenforeal said:


> Matt R said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why? Modified barely changed at all. We just defined what was meant by dash pods.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks. What do you mean by cutting below the dash vs. cutting above it? Also, what if the speaker in the dash is smaller? Can you put 5.25 in there if in the same location as OEM, but just have the hole modified?
> 
> 
> 
> That post i made says cutting below the GRILL not below the dash. In modified the rules dont state any particular size restrictions on speakers.
> 
> 
> 
> Black05Hemi said:
> 
> 
> 
> Upon reading the rules again, my truck was in the gray area for Modified last year. But, the way the rules are spelled out this year, there is no doubt, it's in ModEx. So, I don't have a huge problem with that, since it was borderline anyway.
> 
> But, changing the rules in ModEx...2012 "Enclosures may be externally mounted"...2013 "External speaker enclosures not permitted" puts my Jeep in Extreme. Not happening.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The rules get updated and/or clarified every year. MECA usually tries to have them posted up by the first of the year.
> The rule of cutting external metal in modex is meant to be for infront of the b-pillars. If you have external enclosures or amp racks etc. behind the b pillar that will be fine and the rule will be updated.
> We haven't caught everything yet. We spent alot of time on the new format and we'll be making a few clarifications over the next week or so.
> 
> 
> 
> highly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well, that shut ME up! Thanks, Matt. It IS going to be an interesting year after all!
> 
> -Todd
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Cant wait to see/hear it man!!!!!!!!!
> 
> Hey guys, keep the questions coming, anything thats not clear we want to make clear asap.
> 
> Pillars weren't specifically defined for modified or modex, we'll have that as an update within the next week.
> 
> Matt
Click to expand...


----------



## Black05Hemi

Alright, my Jeep stays in ModEx. I can deal with that.

I still think my truck is borderline Modified when you said "no particular size restrictions on speakers". The borderline part of the rules says "cutting of dash for any reason". There's a panel that goes over my dash. So, no cutting underneath the panel to fit a larger speaker? No cutting the hole in the panel itself to make it bigger? Can't do either? Can do both? Clarification please.


----------



## darrenforeal

Matt R said:


> darrenforeal said:
> 
> 
> 
> That post i made says cutting below the GRILL not below the dash. In modified the rules dont state any particular size restrictions on speakers.
> 
> 
> 
> thanks Matt. Regarding MODIFIED class. So if the vehicle has 3 inch drivers stock in the dash you can take those out and cut out the hole in the dash, so it is larger to fit 5.25s in those spots? Just as long as the angles are the same and not in a pod type deal?
Click to expand...


----------



## papasin

highly said:


> So how many L8s are you going to stuff in the floor of THAT?!


L8s? Wait, if I say anymore, I need to be in witness protection .


----------



## SQHemi

Black05Hemi said:


> You disqualified my truck from Modified, which has won Cali State Finals three straight years. You disqualified John Fisher's Toyota 4-Runner, because his pods don't meet the stated sizing. And, now he has to redo his front stage. Again! And, unless i'm reading the rules wrong, my Jeep now has to go from ModEx to Extreme, because the sub enclosure sits underneath the vehicle in the back, where the spare tire use to be. Which is ridiculous. I thought it was bad enough the car had to go to ModEx, i'm not putting that car in Extreme.
> 
> It makes no sense to put these rules into place now, after people have worked over the winter to get their cars prepared for competition this year. I strongly disagree with the way this was handled. And, if I didn't have team commitments, I probably wouldn't even compete in Meca anymore. As it stands, I may go to one show this year. State Finals. I was actually thinking about taking over the promoting in So Cal too. Not anymore.


Are you serious... I'm sorry if I am out of line, but WTF. Quit ya bitchin'  You need to step in to Modex or above regardless of the rule change, into a more challenging competition and push your skills farther. And if you were truly considering being the promoter, this damn well isn't the right attitude for that job. Be the leader, embrace the changes and move forward., challenge yourself. Socal has some amazing sounding cars including yours, don't let this change ruin Meca down there.


----------



## Matt R

Black05Hemi said:


> Alright, my Jeep stays in ModEx. I can deal with that.
> 
> I still think my truck is borderline Modified when you said "no particular size restrictions on speakers". The borderline part of the rules says "cutting of dash for any reason". There's a panel that goes over my dash. So, no cutting underneath the panel to fit a larger speaker? No cutting the hole in the panel itself to make it bigger? Can't do either? Can do both? Clarification please.


If there was a factory speaker there already its no question. You would have to fit without cutting the face or top of the dash. Cutting below a factory dash grill is ok. I think if there is no factory speaker location there, i'll have to run it by the committee and see what the others think.



darrenforeal said:


> Matt R said:
> 
> 
> 
> thanks Matt. Regarding MODIFIED class. So if the vehicle has 3 inch drivers stock in the dash you can take those out and cut out the hole in the dash, so it is larger to fit 5.25s in those spots? Just as long as the angles are the same and not in a pod type deal?
> 
> 
> 
> That is correct, it has to be able to fit under the factory grill. The thing with the dash is to not cut any visable part of the dash so it can be put back to stock with just a replacement grill.
> 
> Matt
Click to expand...


----------



## Matt R

SQHemi said:


> Are you serious... I'm sorry if I am out of line, but WTF. Quit ya bitchin'  You need to step in to Modex or above regardless of the rule change, into a more challenging competition and push your skills farther. And if you were truly considering being the promoter, this damn well isn't the right attitude for that job. Be the leader, embrace the changes and move forward., challenge yourself. Socal has some amazing sounding cars including yours, don't let this change ruin Meca down there.


Haha, yeah what he said! This is some real good advice. 

Most event directors are Master competitors, its not a requirement ny MECA but if your that good step up a class or two.


----------



## MacLeod

I tend to agree with this. If youve won Modified 3 years in a row, its time to take it up a notch.


----------



## KP

Originally Posted by Black05Hemi 
You disqualified my truck from Modified, which has won Cali State Finals three straight years. You disqualified John Fisher's Toyota 4-Runner, because his pods don't meet the stated sizing. And, now he has to redo his front stage. Again! And, unless i'm reading the rules wrong, my Jeep now has to go from ModEx to Extreme, because the sub enclosure sits underneath the vehicle in the back, where the spare tire use to be. Which is ridiculous. I thought it was bad enough the car had to go to ModEx, i'm not putting that car in Extreme.

It makes no sense to put these rules into place now, after people have worked over the winter to get their cars prepared for competition this year. I strongly disagree with the way this was handled. And, if I didn't have team commitments, I probably wouldn't even compete in Meca anymore. As it stands, I may go to one show this year. State Finals. I was actually thinking about taking over the promoting in So Cal too. Not anymore. 

'Are you serious... I'm sorry if I am out of line, but WTF. Quit ya bitchin'  You need to step in to Modex or above regardless of the rule change, into a more challenging competition and push your skills farther. And if you were truly considering being the promoter, this damn well isn't the right attitude for that job. Be the leader, embrace the changes and move forward., challenge yourself. Socal has some amazing sounding cars including yours, don't let this change ruin Meca down there. '


HA, someone beat me to it. To be interested enough to consider being a coordinator you should know that between Finals and the first of the year the rules are reviewed, judges training the Saturday before Freezefest and newly trained judges at Freezefest. Been that way since I have been doing MECA. (on and off for 7 years)

And unless Cali has different rules or the rules have been updated, you can only compete with one vehicle per section at any single show in your name. Mr. Head and myself were denied to compete with more than one car per show in our name even though they would be in different classes but the same section. (SQL) Just an FYI.


----------



## AccordUno

this is funny.. When I competed in MECA, if I did pretty good in a class one year I moved up the following year.. Whats the point of staying in the same class and not challenging yourself.. 

Yea, yea, I know I haven't competed in a while so I should stay out of this discussion, but geez, grow a pair and go compete.. competition is what makes you better, challenges you to excel..


----------



## DAT

Black05Hemi said:


> You disqualified my truck from Modified, which has won Cali State Finals three straight years. You disqualified John Fisher's Toyota 4-Runner, because his pods don't meet the stated sizing. And, now he has to redo his front stage. Again! And, unless i'm reading the rules wrong, my Jeep now has to go from ModEx to Extreme, because the sub enclosure sits underneath the vehicle in the back, where the spare tire use to be. Which is ridiculous. *I thought it was bad enough the car had to go to ModEx, i'm not putting that car in Extreme.*



WTH ? My truck qualified last year for MOD, I did Extreme all year. 

I also think if anyone is World Champ or State Champ say 2 years straight you should actually move up to the next class. Make it more of a challenge, the trophies are ok, but meeting people and hanging out is the best part.


----------



## decibelle

I jumped straight into mod ex my first year competing. Got my ass handed to me for a while but I didn't complain. I like the challenge. What is it you guys say... nut up or shut up?


----------



## MacLeod

Guess this makes me a candy ass for running back to Street this year. LOL 

Sent from my HTC Thunderbolt using Tapatalk 2


----------



## pocket5s

Todd (highly) and I were talking about this early today, but how many of you in modex have 8's in the kicks vented that are now affected by the venting restrictions? a pair of 4" circles are the max now (12.5 square inches each).


----------



## pocket5s

millerlyte said:


> I jumped straight into mod ex my first year competing. Got my ass handed to me for a while but I didn't complain. I like the challenge. What is it you guys say... nut up or shut up?


tell me about it. I jumped in to extreme  In my defense though I had started working on my custom dash long before deciding to compete. If I had gone the other way around, I would be in modex or something. Not that it would make a big difference, I still would have my ass handed to me.


----------



## ErinH

pocket5s said:


> Todd (highly) and I were talking about this early today, but how many of you in modex have 8's in the kicks vented that are now affected by the venting restrictions? a pair of 4" circles are the max now (12.5 square inches each).


I've got variovents so I think I'm good.


----------



## secretsquirl

Question on this line in the rules for alarm.

5 points: As above but with accessory items installed to improve convenience and safety of the installation, including but not limited to backup battery, multiple sirens, proximity sensors, window modules, etc.


Just a clarification: does this mean we have to have all of the above stated items? or at least that many items with some being substituted for others? i could see this being a problem for a car like marks nascar with no windows to roll down. Just trying to make sure i am maximizing points.


----------



## Mic10is

secretsquirl said:


> Question on this line in the rules for alarm.
> 
> 5 points: As above but with accessory items installed to improve convenience and safety of the installation, including but not limited to backup battery, multiple sirens, proximity sensors, window modules, etc.
> 
> 
> Just a clarification: does this mean we have to have all of the above stated items? or at least that many items with some being substituted for others? i could see this being a problem for a car like marks nascar with no windows to roll down. Just trying to make sure i am maximizing points.


5 point alarm covers all entry points. uses multiple sensors. back up battery and at least internal siren.
So while Mark may not be able to use a glass break sensor, he could use a prox in its place.

other keys for 5 point is-all connections are soldered. extensive effort put into making the alarm wires look like OEM harness and brain is clearly hidden from view or easy access.

basically-like other install rules--how much did you go above and beyond the basics.


----------



## secretsquirl

ok so then when it says window module im thinking window up or down, so you are saying its glass break sensor? inside vehicle siren would be considered multiple sirens? and must have a proximity sensor?


----------



## d3adl1fter

bikinpunk said:


> I've got variovents so I think I'm good.


Same here


----------



## Mic10is

secretsquirl said:


> ok so then when it says window module im thinking window up or down, so you are saying its glass break sensor? inside vehicle siren would be considered multiple sirens? and must have a proximity sensor?


Its as many things beyond a basic alarm install.
Basic alarm install usually comes with a impact sensor/shock sensor. Thats pretty much it. It may cover dome light or current sensing as well.

so any and all sensors/features above that.

remote start would be another feature. additional sirens, back up battery, proximity sensor, glass break sensor, sunroof open close, windows up and down, system functions controlled by alarm like turning on devices or lighting by remote.....


also, this is something I never thought of til one competitor in Indy brought it up during Install judging---if installing a window module, dont activate windows down--this could cause a liability or issues, if you accidently bump the button when keys in your pocket etc...and then you are nowhere near your car with the window down...


----------



## Matt R

millerlyte said:


> I jumped straight into mod ex my first year competing. Got my ass handed to me for a while but I didn't complain. I like the challenge. What is it you guys say... nut up or shut up?


Haha, I think I may have heard you complain once 

JK, dont kick my ass! One tough chick here, she's not kidding. She is a great example of what determination can get you. She is absolutely running with the big dogs!


----------



## Black05Hemi

SQHemi said:


> Are you serious... I'm sorry if I am out of line, but WTF. Quit ya bitchin'  You need to step in to Modex or above regardless of the rule change, into a more challenging competition and push your skills farther. And if you were truly considering being the promoter, this damn well isn't the right attitude for that job. Be the leader, embrace the changes and move forward., challenge yourself. Socal has some amazing sounding cars including yours, don't let this change ruin Meca down there.


Thanks dad for the advice. I'll decide what I need to do.


----------



## Black05Hemi

Matt R said:


> Haha, yeah what he said! This is some real good advice.
> 
> Most event directors are Master competitors, its not a requirement ny MECA but if your that good step up a class or two.


No actually its some **** advice, that I don't remember asking for or needing. No wonder I never come on here anymore. I am more than capable of deciding what classes I want to compete in. But, really, thanks for the two cents.


----------



## Black05Hemi

Anyway, Matt thanks for the rules clarifications.

Scott, i'm disappointed you felt the need to mouth off about me. As they say, it is what it is I guess.

I'm done here.


----------



## BigRed

can we get a group hug?


----------



## ErinH

you california guys are a strange group. lol.


----------



## papasin

bikinpunk said:


> you california guys are a strange group. lol.


Hey now, those are some fighting words...especially from someone with a Civic who luckily has windows in the pillars .

Maybe a NorCal/SoCal thing?


----------



## Thumper26

MacLeod said:


> Guess this makes me a candy ass for running back to Street this year. LOL
> 
> Sent from my HTC Thunderbolt using Tapatalk 2


i took the accord from street to street mod, then ran down to stock with the new car. we'll not talk about what that makes me.


----------



## ErinH

papasin said:


> Hey now, those are some fighting words...especially from someone with a Civic who luckily has windows in the pillars .
> 
> Maybe a NorCal/SoCal thing?


Speaking of those pillars...Wish you hadn't just gotten new pillars. I'm selling mine and could've made you a deal. Lol.


----------



## Justin Zazzi

"Anything goes" ... right?

I like oca123's thinking "outside" the box from his post here.




> it ends up sticking out this much:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sorry about the tape, still working on placement and aiming. broom material also matters, wood is better.
> 
> :laugh:


----------



## papasin

bikinpunk said:


> Speaking of those pillars...Wish you hadn't just gotten new pillars. I'm selling mine and could've made you a deal. Lol.


Quite happy with mine, thanks. Post it on 8th. Where do u think I am (re)selling your old pods .


----------



## DAT

papasin said:


> Quite happy with mine, thanks. Post it on 8th. Where do u think I am (re)selling your old pods .



Hey Papasin. I hear your car is sounding really good now. Good luck this year .


----------



## papasin

DAT said:


> Hey Papasin. I hear your car is sounding really good now. Good luck this year .


So it didn't last year? 

Hehe, it's progressing, but there are still a couple things that need to be worked out. One is pretty annoying and borderline unacceptable. It will be an interesting year in Modified in CA for the reasons mentioned .


----------



## michaelsil1

BigRed said:


> can we get a group hug?


*No!*


That would be camaraderie, I will not stand for that!


----------



## Navy Chief

I am looking for a collective opinion on this question so I thought this may be the best place to ask. I have also emailed MECA to get their response.

Based on my current system setup I can go to either Modified Street or Modified, the deciding factor will be where I put my sub.

If I build a full on custom center console enclosure with the sub in it I will get put into Modified based on the sub being placed forward of the "B" pillar, that much i get.

So the first question is, if I build a custom center console and extend its length (or build a 2 piece console with an extension) all the way to the front of the back seat (extended cab Silverado) and place the sub and its enclosure only in that portion of the console that is behind the "B" pillar can I get put into Modified Street. The rules say that modifying the interior alone is not reason to be moved up in class (i.e. custom console), the question is if that console is part of or flows into another piece that does have audio after the "B" pillar is that allowed. The last option would be to remove the back of the stock console and build an enclosure that flowed into the stock console, The back of the factory console just wont look right with an enclosure butted up against it.

The second question is, if I build an enclosure in the bed for a "party sub" just to turn on for fun or to do Phat 18 competitions etc., will that sub count against my class placement for SQL if it is not connected during SQL judging. If it does count what SQL class do you default to if you have a sub in the bed of a truck. The enclosure would not be ported into the cab, just a huge enclosure in the forward end of the bed that would be removable if needed.

Thanks for all the help


----------



## KP

This is from the NOT permitted side of Mod Street: Changing the location, access, or functional ability of
any item originally provided by the manufacturer
within the vehicle in front of the B-pillar (i.e. center
console, glove box, seating, factory panel). Permitted
items are excluded.

Seems Mod Street is out.


----------



## Navy Chief

AcuraTLSQ said:


> This is from the NOT permitted side of Mod Street: Changing the location, access, or functional ability of
> any item originally provided by the manufacturer
> within the vehicle in front of the B-pillar (i.e. center
> console, glove box, seating, factory panel). Permitted
> items are excluded.
> 
> Seems Mod Street is out.


Ya but is also says "Modifications or upgrades to a vehicle’s interior,
exterior, engine, or related components do not necessarily move a vehicle to a higher class unless done to improve the sound quality system beyond the limits outlined in the Permitted list." 

If I kept the factory console and preserved the cup holders and storage (which I intended to do) and just rebuilt the back of the console I think it should be allowed. What are your thoughts.


----------



## Navy Chief

Got the official word back from MECA, modify the center console and your in Modified or greater.

So I am still looking for a response on putting subs in the bed, what SQL class does this put you in and what if they are disconnected but still installed.


----------



## tnaudio

I saw a few cars last year that were in modified street because the cut/vented through the rear deck. But in your case the subs in the bed area might be interpreted as "using air space outside of vehicle" which would land you in modex.


----------



## Darth SQ

Navy Chief said:


> Got the official word back from MECA, modify the center console and your in Modified or greater.
> 
> *So I am still looking for a response on putting subs in the bed, what SQL class does this put you in and what if they are disconnected but still installed*.


As am I.
Looking forward to the answer on this.


Bret
PPI-ART COLLECOTR


----------



## pocket5s

From how I read the rules in 2012 it might be modex, but this year the rules say no external speaker enclosures in modex. I suppose one could argue that if you put a camper shell on it is no longer exterior. The other argument would be anything outside the cabin is external. 

Definitely a point where one could split hairs on it.


----------



## Matt R

Navy Chief said:


> Ya but is also says "Modifications or upgrades to a vehicle’s interior,
> exterior, engine, or related components do not necessarily move a vehicle to a higher class unless done to improve the sound quality system beyond the limits outlined in the Permitted list."
> 
> If I kept the factory console and preserved the cup holders and storage (which I intended to do) and just rebuilt the back of the console I think it should be allowed. What are your thoughts.


As Steve Stern likes to say the "spirit of the rule" is to not have modifications done to the interior infront of the apillars that would "enhance the sound characturistics of the vehicle" 

If there is a modification done infront of the apillar, I think you would have to show that there is no way that it enhanced the sound at all.

I would consider a center console that is smaller, shorter, using softer materials, etc. would be a potential sound enhancement. 

If I were going to make that type of modification (and want to stay in a lower class), I would document the size and materials of the stock console with pictures of measurements and materials. That way you could raise the question. 

I think thats the only way to pull it off. It is walking a fine line though. It will end up being an opinion of, will it enhance or potentially improve the sound of the car. I would say if it has smoother lines, more rounded over edges, etc. it would be modified class.

The rule for modex is going to be clarified to allow external enclosures behind the bpillars. That would not be ok for any lower class. 

If you wanted to just put an enclosure back there for fun, then take it out for the competition that would be fine. No cutting, etc.


----------



## Matt R

PPI-ART COLLECTOR said:


> As am I.
> Looking forward to the answer on this.
> 
> 
> Bret
> PPI-ART COLLECOTR


If your reffering to a sub enclosure with no cut through or cutting of metal at all, this might be ok. An spl system that is intended for red light pounding, I think would be ok, but i'll have to run it by the committe.


----------



## Navy Chief

Matt R said:


> As Steve Stern likes to say the "spirit of the rule" is to not have modifications done to the interior infront of the apillars that would "enhance the sound characturistics of the vehicle"
> 
> If there is a modification done infront of the apillar, I think you would have to show that there is no way that it enhanced the sound at all.
> 
> I would consider a center console that is smaller, shorter, using softer materials, etc. would be a potential sound enhancement.
> 
> If I were going to make that type of modification (and want to stay in a lower class), I would document the size and materials of the stock console with pictures of measurements and materials. That way you could raise the question.
> 
> I think thats the only way to pull it off. It is walking a fine line though. It will end up being an opinion of, will it enhance or potentially improve the sound of the car. I would say if it has smoother lines, more rounded over edges, etc. it would be modified class.
> 
> The rule for modex is going to be clarified to allow external enclosures behind the bpillars. That would not be ok for any lower class.
> 
> If you wanted to just put an enclosure back there for fun, then take it out for the competition that would be fine. No cutting, etc.





Matt R said:


> If your reffering to a sub enclosure with no cut through or cutting of metal at all, this might be ok. An spl system that is intended for red light pounding, I think would be ok, but i'll have to run it by the committe.


Thanks Matt, your response was the one I was looking for. Steve is the one I have been emailing with at MECA and your right inline with his answers. Everything is pointing to me ending up in MODEX because I also want to run my midbass in the floor so I guess I am stuck. My concern was that this would be my first year competing and i was trying to avoid ending up in the same class as the big dogs my first year.


----------



## Darth SQ

Matt R said:


> If your reffering to a sub enclosure with no cut through or cutting of metal at all, this might be ok. An spl system that is intended for red light pounding, I think would be ok, but i'll have to run it by the committe.


Thank you Matt for responding.
My question is do the rules allow the judge to ignore and overlook car audio equipment that is not being used during competing?
I won't be using the 2nd row 3-ways, the rear barn door 6x9s, and most likely the rear sub enclosure for the three 12s depending on how the subs perform for sq.
All of these, including their amps, will be switched off.


Bret
PPI-ART COLLECTOR


----------



## Matt R

PPI-ART COLLECTOR said:


> Thank you Matt for responding.
> My question is do the rules allow the judge to ignore and overlook car audio equipment that is not being used during competing?
> I won't be using the 2nd row 3-ways, the rear barn door 6x9s, and most likely the rear sub enclosure for the three 12s depending on how the subs perform for sq.
> All of these, including their amps, will be switched off.
> 
> 
> Bret
> PPI-ART COLLECTOR


Hi Bret, I'm not completely understanding you system or question. 

What vehicle, where is it all mounted, what class are you building for? You said "depending on how the subs perform for sq". So maybe you will have the external sub system turned on?

If we can start from the beginning on your vehicle that will help us to figure out where you belong or how to proceed.


----------



## ErinH

Navy Chief said:


> Thanks Matt, your response was the one I was looking for. Steve is the one I have been emailing with at MECA and your right inline with his answers. Everything is pointing to me ending up in MODEX because I also want to run my midbass in the floor so I guess I am stuck. My concern was that this would be my first year competing and i was trying to avoid ending up in the same class as the big dogs my first year.


FWIW, that's exactly where I started a few years ago. Got lumped in to modex from the get go with my kicks. There's a lot of great cars in modex but there's great cars in every class. In some ways, one could argue that with people pushing the envelope of install in their respective class, the lower classes may be even tougher.


----------



## Mic10is

Navy Chief said:


> Thanks Matt, your response was the one I was looking for. Steve is the one I have been emailing with at MECA and your right inline with his answers. Everything is pointing to me ending up in MODEX because I also want to run my midbass in the floor so I guess I am stuck. My concern was that this would be my first year competing and i was trying to avoid ending up in the same class as the big dogs my first year.


There really are no "easy" classes. Modified is stacked as well


----------



## Darth SQ

Matt R said:


> Hi Bret, I'm not completely understanding you system or question.
> 
> What vehicle, where is it all mounted, what class are you building for? You said "depending on how the subs perform for sq". So maybe you will have the external sub system turned on?
> 
> If we can start from the beginning on your vehicle that will help us to figure out where you belong or how to proceed.


The system is a little complicated.
It's all going in my 97 Chevrolet Suburban as we speak in hopes of finishing the install by June.
If all goes well, it will debut at the NorCal MECA event that usually happens in August.
After that, I will make any changes and adjustments necessary over the winter and then compete at as many west coast and southwest MECA events that I can attend in the 2014 season.
I am hoping to compete in the mod class but If I understand the rules correctly, the a front console sub enclosure puts me in modex.
Here's the complete system and pathways including a better pic showing the layout.

Note-During competition, only pathways #1, #3, and maybe #4 will be operational.


PPI-P771NX Source Unit-->PPI ACM-420 Noise Gate-->PPI PAR-245 Parametric Equilizer-->PPI DEQ-230 1/3 Octave Equilizer-->(trees off from here into five separate paths demonstrated below)

*Path #1 (Front Seat Stage)*
-->PPI-PSC-221 Phase Shift Controller-->(splits into two more paths demonstrated below)

Subpath #1
-->PPI Art A204.2-->(channels 1,2 into the PPI Power Class PC3.65C tweeters & channels 3,4 into the PPI Power Class PC3.65C 2.5" mids (both sets mounted in A-pillar pods))

Subpath #2
-->PPI-Art A200.2-->(channels 1,2 into the PPI Power Class PC3.65C 6.5" midbass (mounted in doors))

*Path #2 (Center Row & 3rd Row Seat Stage)*
-->PPI-Art Ax606.2-->(channels 1,2 into the PPI Power Class PC3.65C tweeters, channels 3,4 into the PPI Power Class PC3.65C 2.5" mids (both sets mounted in headliner pods behind the b-pillars), & channels 5,6 into the PPI Power Class PC3.65C 6.5" midbass (mounted in side doors))

*Path #3*
-->PPI FRX-322 Active Crossover-->PPI Art A600.2-->(channels 1,2 into the two PPI Art A8.SQ 8" subwoofers mounted in the front seat row, sealed, center console enclosure)

*Path #4*
-->PPI FRX-322 Active Crossover-->PPI-Art A1200.2-->(channels 1,2 bridged mono into the three PPI Art A12.SQ 12" subwoofers mounted rearward behind the 3rd seat in a ported enclosure)

*Path #5*
-->PPI-Art A300.2-->(channels 1,2 into the PPI Power Class PC.692 Coaxial 6x9" s speakers mounted in both rear barn doors)

(Note-pathways #1 through #5 can be switched on/off depending on use)
(Note-this does not include the video monitors)

















*So my question once again is, will the MECA judge based on the rules ignore and overlook the equipment not being used during competition (i.e. paths #2 and #5)?*


*Bret
PPI-ART COLLECTOR*



.


----------



## chefhow

Bret, just compete in Extreme and not limit yourself.


----------



## Mic10is

If its in the car--it counts.
too many variables for competitors to "prove" stuff is not being used" and there are many people who will cheat. its a nearly impossible situation to police


----------



## Darth SQ

Mic10is said:


> If its in the car--it counts.
> too many variables for competitors to "prove" stuff is not being used" and there are many people who will cheat. its a nearly impossible situation to police





chefhow said:


> Bret, just compete in Extreme and not limit yourself.


Goods points.
I'm going to have to think about that.
Especially now that I'm considering pulling out the PSC-221 phase shifter and using the new PPI DEQ-8 dsp.

What I would really really love to see happen is MECA embrace and promote an "old school" class to compete in.
I'd be all over that.


Bret
PPI-ART COLLECTOR


----------



## Navy Chief

PPI-ART COLLECTOR said:


> I am hoping to compete in the mod class but If I understand the rules correctly, the a front console sub enclosure puts me in modex.
> *Bret
> PPI-ART COLLECTOR*
> .


Bret,
The way I read the rules a center console sub will put you in modified, not in MODEX. I was trying to find a way to get into modified street and modify my console. I would read the rules on a-pillar pods and sizes though, I think there are some specific size restrictions in modified for those.


----------



## Darth SQ

Navy Chief said:


> Bret,
> The way I read the rules a center console sub will put you in modified, not in MODEX. I was trying to find a way to get into modified street and modify my console. I would read the rules on a-pillar pods and sizes though, I think there are some specific size restrictions in modified for those.


Thanks Chief!
I'll go back through the mod street, mod, modex rules again.

Yeah I read that about the a-pillar pods.
Good thing the 3way set I'm using will work within the limitations.


Bret
PPI-ART COLLECTOR


----------



## Matt R

PPI-ART COLLECTOR said:


> The system is a little complicated.
> It's all going in my 97 Chevrolet Suburban as we speak in hopes of finishing the install by June.
> If all goes well, it will debut at the NorCal MECA event that usually happens in August.
> After that, I will make any changes and adjustments necessary over the winter and then compete at as many west coast and southwest MECA events that I can attend in the 2014 season.
> I am hoping to compete in the mod class but If I understand the rules correctly, the a front console sub enclosure puts me in modex.
> Here's the complete system and pathways including a better pic showing the layout.
> 
> Note-During competition, only pathways #1, #3, and maybe #4 will be operational.
> 
> 
> PPI-P771NX Source Unit-->PPI ACM-420 Noise Gate-->PPI PAR-245 Parametric Equilizer-->PPI DEQ-230 1/3 Octave Equilizer-->(trees off from here into five separate paths demonstrated below)
> 
> *Path #1 (Front Seat Stage)*
> -->PPI-PSC-221 Phase Shift Controller-->(splits into two more paths demonstrated below)
> 
> Subpath #1
> -->PPI Art A204.2-->(channels 1,2 into the PPI Power Class PC3.65C tweeters & channels 3,4 into the PPI Power Class PC3.65C 2.5" mids (both sets mounted in A-pillar pods))
> 
> Subpath #2
> -->PPI-Art A200.2-->(channels 1,2 into the PPI Power Class PC3.65C 6.5" midbass (mounted in doors))
> 
> *Path #2 (Center Row & 3rd Row Seat Stage)*
> -->PPI-Art Ax606.2-->(channels 1,2 into the PPI Power Class PC3.65C tweeters, channels 3,4 into the PPI Power Class PC3.65C 2.5" mids (both sets mounted in headliner pods behind the b-pillars), & channels 5,6 into the PPI Power Class PC3.65C 6.5" midbass (mounted in side doors))
> 
> *Path #3*
> -->PPI FRX-322 Active Crossover-->PPI Art A600.2-->(channels 1,2 into the two PPI Art A8.SQ 8" subwoofers mounted in the front seat row, sealed, center console enclosure)
> 
> *Path #4*
> -->PPI FRX-322 Active Crossover-->PPI-Art A1200.2-->(channels 1,2 bridged mono into the three PPI Art A12.SQ 12" subwoofers mounted rearward behind the 3rd seat in a ported enclosure)
> 
> *Path #5*
> -->PPI-Art A300.2-->(channels 1,2 into the PPI Power Class PC.692 Coaxial 6x9" s speakers mounted in both rear barn doors)
> 
> (Note-pathways #1 through #5 can be switched on/off depending on use)
> (Note-this does not include the video monitors)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *So my question once again is, will the MECA judge based on the rules ignore and overlook the equipment not being used during competition (i.e. paths #2 and #5)?*
> 
> 
> *Bret
> PPI-ART COLLECTOR*
> 
> 
> 
> .


If I had one piece of advice to give you as a competitor it would be keep it simple.

To answer your question direct, NO. There would be too much going on for a verification judge to determine what is playing, turned on, turned off, etc. 

That being said, all the things you mentioned seem to fit into Modified class. 

In Mod Street you are not permitted to put speakers larger than 2 inches in the pillars. You are permitted to put speakers up to 6.5 inches in the factory locations and kicks.


----------



## pocket5s

I have a comment/question regarding SQ2 classification. It seems it would be more fair to have SQ2 be up to modified and have SQ2+ cars be Modex and up. 

The thinking is that if you look at scores for 2012 finals, 1st place for Street, Mod Street and Modified are all pretty close. 1st place in Street would have taken 2nd place in Modified. 

Now, look at the point spread between Modified and Modex, and it is an 8 point spread. Yes, those are all 1 seat scores but given the modifications allowed, it seems logical that it should be applied to 2 seat. 

I realize 2 seat isn't exactly popular, but perhaps more might give it a shot if they didn't have to compete directly with Mark, Kirk, etc. without the cutting of metal that is allowed via Modex and up?

maybe something to think about for 2014.


----------



## MacLeod

That's not a bad idea. Have a SQ2 class for Stock-Modified and then one for ModEx and up. I'd be up for trying it a couple times if I didn't have to compete with Cook's or Eldridge's cars. 

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy Note II using Tapatalk 2.


----------



## pocket5s

MacLeod said:


> That's not a bad idea. Have a SQ2 class for Stock-Modified and then one for ModEx and up. I'd be up for trying it a couple times if I didn't have to compete with Cook's or Eldridge's cars.
> 
> Sent from my Samsung Galaxy Note II using Tapatalk 2.


Current SQ2 goes from stock to Modified Street, with SQ2+ going from Modified up to Masters. I think Modex and up would seem more appropriate. Looking again at the 2012 finals scores, the top cars in modex, extreme and masters are all competitive with each other. same for Modified down to Street.


----------



## DAT

MacLeod said:


> That's not a bad idea. Have a SQ2 class for Stock-Modified and then one for ModEx and up. I'd be up for trying it a couple times if I didn't have to compete with Cook's or Eldridge's cars.
> 
> Sent from my Samsung Galaxy Note II using Tapatalk 2.


Don't be scared of Cook or Eldridge, you can do it!

I have faith in you...


----------



## Mic10is

um Cook has Never done SQ2 that I am aware...Kirk has but stopped

Good Luck getting any changes done to SQ2. The fact that its still around amazes me.


----------



## pocket5s

If I were to try it sometime down the road, I'd want to start in sq2 (not plus) and get a feel for it before diving into that magical stuff that Mark does, ya know?


----------



## MacLeod

DAT said:


> Don't be scared of Cook or Eldridge, you can do it!
> 
> I have faith in you...


I have thought about trying it. I think it would be kinda fun to give it a shot. 

And no, a car with stock speaker locations is gonna have the floor wiped with it up against the likes of Cook's or Eldridge's. I wanna have at least a fighting chance. LOL 

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy Note II using Tapatalk 2.


----------



## pocket5s

MacLeod said:


> I have thought about trying it. I think it would be kinda fun to give it a shot.
> 
> Sent from my Samsung Galaxy Note II using Tapatalk 2.


After hearing my first 2 seat at iasca finals I thought it was pretty cool too. Really odd to hear imaging from the 'wrong' seat. I'm not nearly ready to give it a shot though.


----------



## KP

My car is not a 2 seater. Just lucky. 'Even a broken clock is right twice a day'.

SQ2+ was created to hopefully bring in more folks to SQ2. Has not worked so far. Im sure he would make what ever SQ2 classes you want. It is $100 to enter, at any show. Winner of the class gets 1/2, MECA gets the other 1/2.


----------



## Mic10is

Id say just do an Open SQ2 class. there are so few people, it makes zero sense to have classes.

and sq2 entry fee changed last year or the year before. It used to be $100 split, but hasnt been for at least a year or 2. Its usually just double the single seat cost and not split (cover cost of 2 score sheets)


----------



## pocket5s

I was merely suggesting moving the split from modified to modex.


----------



## MacLeod

pocket5s said:


> I was merely suggesting moving the split from modified to modex.


Shows what I know. I didn't know there was a split in SQ2. I thought it was just one big open class. Guess I should pay more attention. I might try it just for laughs later on. Gotta get one seat dialed in first tho.  

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy Note II using Tapatalk 2.


----------



## USDMBB

Matt R or anybody else. Two quick questions

First, On this rule.

Dash pods above or in front of dash cut out up to 4.5 inches
above factory surface
So A pod attached to dash 4.5 Tall No Width requirement as this reads

Second On Not permitted
A-pillar mods protruding more than 3.5 inches from the
factory surface
So my pods are not part of the ACTUAL A-PILLAR, They have to be removed to remove the A pillar. So what is the actual rule here? 
I mean this moves a daily driven car into a class that by rule of what can be done should be trailed to events.


----------



## tintbox

Beautiful car in the pic.


----------



## USDMBB

tintbox said:


> Beautiful car in the pic.


Thanks, I am starting to rebuild it I was rear ended about a year and a half ago and just didn't want to touch it lol


----------



## Matt R

USDMBB said:


> Matt R or anybody else. Two quick questions
> 
> First, On this rule.
> 
> Dash pods above or in front of dash cut out up to 4.5 inches
> above factory surface
> So A pod attached to dash 4.5 Tall No Width requirement as this reads
> 
> Second On Not permitted
> A-pillar mods protruding more than 3.5 inches from the
> factory surface
> So my pods are not part of the ACTUAL A-PILLAR, They have to be removed to remove the A pillar. So what is the actual rule here?
> I mean this moves a daily driven car into a class that by rule of what can be done should be trailed to events.


I'm assuming your talking about Modex?

The intent of the rule is to have a pod that is just large enough to cover the 60 square inch hole. The "above or infront of dash cut out" is the limitation.

If the pod is not part of the pillar than the pillar limitations dont apply.

Matt


----------



## thehatedguy

It's BS that horns or waveguides can't be used in Modified Street but you can have kickpanels with up to a 6.5" speaker


----------



## MacLeod

thehatedguy said:


> It's BS that horns or waveguides can't be used in Modified Street but you can have kickpanels with up to a 6.5" speaker


I don't think so. The class progressions are about right IMO. Stock has stock locations and HU processing only. Street adds unlimited processing. Mod Street adds kick panels then Modified adds dash mids, horns and such. Then ModEx takes over with allowing vehicle modifications. 

Mod Street is also meant for guys running stock locations but have to cut a lot of sheet metal because the OEM opening is only 3" in diameter. My guess is that since Mod Street is also meant for stock locations, they didn't want to advance it even more by allowing horns. Those would be on more of a level footing in Modified where dash speakers and more options are available. 

Sent from my beloved Samsung Galaxy Note 2.


----------



## thehatedguy

It doesn't make sense to me to allow kicks with a speaker up to 6.5" and a tweeter, but you can't put horns in. Horns are no more difficult to install than kicks...even less so. And horns don't take up any more space than kicks.

.


----------



## thehatedguy

But I'm like 1 of like 3 people in the world who still like horns.


----------



## MacLeod

Yeah, y'all are a minority. 

I get what you are saying but I consider horns to be more on par with 4's in the dash and not so much with a pair of 5's in some Qforms in the kicks. 

It's all a matter of opinion of course but I think stock locations ---> kick panels ---> horns/dash is a more "natural" progression. Mod Street really is a pretty limited class with what you can do so I don't mind them keeping horns in Modified and up. 

Sent from my beloved Samsung Galaxy Note 2.


----------



## thehatedguy

I get it and I don't get it.

Oh well...funds not looking good to compete this year anyways.


----------



## bigbubba

thehatedguy said:


> But I'm like 1 of like 3 people in the world who still like horns.


I'm trying to get together an old schoolish build for next season and it will include early style ID horns. If I can stop messing with the truck long enough.


I have an issue, not so much with the rules but judging/score sheets. I like detailed information about what the judges did or did not like about my system. Gives me an idea on what I need to work on for next time. I know they have the 1 out of 10, 1 out of 5 sections but can it hurt to add specific notes on problem areas. Most of the shows I've been to, by the time they hand out score sheets everyone is just ready to get the hell out of there, including the judges so it's hard to discuss with them about the sheets. Tell me if the stage is too low, off to the right, not enough mid....something. At Freeze Fest not one judge initialed the sheet, so I don't know which one gave me which scores. 

Maybe I'm asking/expecting too much from this.


----------



## thehatedguy

I always gave feedback right after I judged the car...as much as time allowed me to give.


----------



## MacLeod

The Freezefest judges didn't write anything on the score sheets but they did give very good feedback when they jumped out of the car. As long as they do that, I'm happy. 

I'd like for them to redesign the score sheets so instead of a comments section at the bottom, have a comment line below every criteria. That way they could give you your sub bass score then add any comment they needed to right there. Nothing more useless than a score sheet of all 8's, 4's and 2's without any comments or feedback. We competitors ***** about it every year and it seems it gets WORSE every year. 

I don't expect the guy to stand there for 30 minutes and break down every aspect of my system but at least give me something to work on for next show even if it's just one thing. 

Sent from my beloved Samsung Galaxy Note 2.


----------



## pocket5s

I wonder if it is an experience thing. Luckily for me the one judge that is my area gives both written and verbal feedback which is awesome. I went to two iasca shows last year including finals. I got good feedback from both of those judges as well.

The one big meca show I went to out of state (the Vinny) had three judges of course, and the last judged forgot to give any verbal feedback but did give good written comments, as did the other two.

What I like about the iasca sheet is it has a couple of diagrams for showing things like width and depth. That tells me more than an 7 or 8 (or 15 on iasca out of 20 or whatever), and doesn't take any time to write. just draw some small circles for placement or a line for depth and it tells me a lot. For example my first iasca show the judge put circles where he heard left, left-center, center, right-center and right, and how high he heard each one. 5 circles told me a lot quicker than having to write out a couple of sentences.


----------



## thehatedguy

Why are proaudio coaxes barred in the lower classes just because they have a compression driver over a regular tweeter?

Just makes no sense...and is a pretty dumbass rule.

I'll give you the horn thing, but this? This is really dumb.


----------



## Mic10is

MacLeod said:


> I don't think so. The class progressions are about right IMO. Stock has stock locations and HU processing only. Street adds unlimited processing. Mod Street adds kick panels then Modified adds dash mids, horns and such. Then ModEx takes over with allowing vehicle modifications.
> 
> Mod Street is also meant for guys running stock locations but have to cut a lot of sheet metal because the OEM opening is only 3" in diameter. My guess is that since Mod Street is also meant for stock locations, they didn't want to advance it even more by allowing horns. Those would be on more of a level footing in Modified where dash speakers and more options are available.
> 
> Sent from my beloved Samsung Galaxy Note 2.


The intent of Mod Street was for the Tuner and car show crowd bc they often have things like Qform Kick panels or other Kick panels , more to get Audio points in a car show, than for sound performance.


----------



## MacLeod

thehatedguy said:


> Why are proaudio coaxes barred in the lower classes just because they have a compression driver over a regular tweeter?
> 
> Just makes no sense...and is a pretty dumbass rule.
> 
> I'll give you the horn thing, but this? This is really dumb.


You're just bound and determined to find something to ***** about ain't ya? 

Don't think I've ever heard anybody mention wanting to use pro audio coaxials. Come to think of it, I don't think I've ever even heard of pro audio coaxials! LOL 

My guess would be that the lower classes are aimed at entry level competitors to come in and play. So restricting those classes to "normal" car audio gear means less chance to scare them off. Don't want nobody to be skurred. 

If you want to use more exotic or unconventional gear then the upper classes are for you. 

Sent from my beloved Samsung Galaxy Note 2.


----------



## Kevin K

But some of the SQ rules not allowed in stock like changing location, access, or functional ability of any item originally provided by manufacturer anywhere in vehicle.

Removal of storage bin and adding a voltmeter in sunglass holder put legally puts me past Stock and Street and modified street into the modified class. Oh well....


----------



## thehatedguy

So it's ok to put some scan illuminators and berillyium tweeters in a street/stock car, but you can't use the factory waveguides with a jbl gti set or proaudio coaxes?

How is that remotely fair and balanced?


----------



## MacLeod

Kevin K said:


> But some of the SQ rules not allowed in stock like changing location, access, or functional ability of any item originally provided by manufacturer anywhere in vehicle.
> 
> Removal of storage bin and adding a voltmeter in sunglass holder put legally puts me past Stock and Street and modified street into the modified class. Oh well....


I don't think it does. Might see what Matt says but I always thought that only refers to audio specific. You can't put a head unit or something like that in there but a volt meter wouldn't be considered audio IMO. 

Sent from my beloved Samsung Galaxy Note 2.


----------



## asota

thehatedguy said:


> So it's ok to put some scan illuminators and berillyium tweeters in a street/stock car, but you can't use the factory waveguides with a jbl gti set or proaudio coaxes?
> 
> How is that remotely fair and balanced?


What car comes with waveguides from the factory? If the coax is the same size as factory there is no reason at all you can't use it and if the car came from factory with waveguides there is no reason at all you can't use them.


----------



## thehatedguy

No you can't use a pro coax because they use compression drivers for the highs.

Why does it matter what car came with wavguides? No car comes with accuton diamond dome tweeters but you are welcome to use them, but you can't use the waveguides that come factory with the jbl GTi component set.


----------



## MacLeod

thehatedguy said:


> No you can't use a pro coax because they use compression drivers for the highs.
> 
> Why does it matter what car came with wavguides? No car comes with accuton diamond dome tweeters but you are welcome to use them, but you can't use the waveguides that come factory with the jbl GTi component set.


Guess I don't get what has you so up in arms. First off, why would you want to use a coax in the doors anyway vs a high end set of components. Second, it's not like you have to compete in Master if you want waveguides or whatever. We're talking a 1 class bump to Modified. I'm not seeing the big deal. 


Sent from my beloved Samsung Galaxy Note 2.


----------



## Kevin K

Well according to rules listed and in talking to Steve and one of the judges, that's how it is. Hard for me to compete against others with certain audio upgrades that do effect sound in same class. I guess I'm gonna have to study rules and play it smart as I can afford.





MacLeod said:


> I don't think it does. Might see what Matt says but I always thought that only refers to audio specific. You can't put a head unit or something like that in there but a volt meter wouldn't be considered audio IMO.
> 
> Sent from my beloved Samsung Galaxy Note 2.


----------



## stereo_luver

I've made no changes to my install over last year. If I read the rules right I am now bumped from Mod Street to Modex. Yeah...I don't think so.

Chuck


----------



## asota

stereo_luver said:


> I've made no changes to my install over last year. If I read the rules right I am now bumped from Mod Street to Modex. Yeah...I don't think so.
> 
> Chuck


Why is your class changed the rules aren't really changed from last year for mod street?


----------



## DAT

stereo_luver said:


> I've made no changes to my install over last year. If I read the rules right I am now bumped from Mod Street to Modex. Yeah...I don't think so.
> 
> Chuck


Chuck-- You serious? I'm going to have to look at the new rules .


----------



## MacLeod

Yeah I didn't think Mod Street had changed that much either. What is it that's bumping you up to ModEx? 

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy Note 2 via Tapatalk 2.


----------



## MacLeod

I'm actually thinking of jumping up to Mod Street. The speaker opening in my doors are pretty small and I'm having to use 1.5" of spacer to get my mids on there and I think it's choking them off since they're basically playing in a tube with a small opening at the end. 

I'm really wanting to open it up a lot more so I can use less spacer and let these things breathe. I'll lose the 9 points I got at Freezefest but I think it'll be worth it in the long run. Hmmm, decisions. 

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy Note 2 using Tapatalk 2.


----------



## Kevin K

Why will you lose 9 points?


----------



## asota

Why would you want to go to mod street according to Mic that class is for show cars only and no sq cars are in it.


----------



## MacLeod

That's even better. Maybe I can finally win one! 

Nah, one of the main reasons they started Mod Street was for cars like mine. More and more new cars are coming out with tiny little opening for their stock speakers so you'd have to cut more than 1/2" of sheet metal to get a speaker to fit so you'd be in ModEx with Steve Cook and Erin but running stock speaker locations. I would've thought they could just get rid of the stupid 1/2" rule and be done with it. Stock size speaker in the stock location so what does it matter? 

I already shaved off 1/2" but it's not enough. I need to lop off a good inch of metal to round out the opening more so I can mount the mid more flush, let it breathe better and also be able to have all the door poppers fit. 

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy Note 2 using Tapatalk 2.


----------



## chefhow

asota said:


> Why would you want to go to mod street according to Mic that class is for show cars only and no sq cars are in it.


Chris, what he said was the INTENT of the class WAS TO BRING show cars into the mix. He made no mention of no SQ cars being in the class now. Its not nice to put words in peoples mouths...


----------



## Kevin K

so why would you lose the 9 points? because of changing classes?


----------



## MacLeod

Yeah, if you change classes, your points don't go with you. I'm ok with that. That way you don't sandbag in a lower class all year then jump to a higher class. 

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy Note 2 using Tapatalk 2.


----------



## Kevin K

Uh oh, at freezefest they really didn't get my class thing straighten out. Was verified one way, one of the judges deemed another and changed. That's not good.


----------



## thehatedguy

I still don't get what is so advantagous or advanced with a compression driver for highs in and of itself that they are banned in the lower classes.


----------



## MacLeod

Kevin K said:


> Uh oh, at freezefest they really didn't get my class thing straighten out. Was verified one way, one of the judges deemed another and changed. That's not good.


Which judged changed it? If Vinny overruled it then that probably the way it is. He's the top dawg in SQ aside from Steve Stern. I'd go with the class Vinny said you were in. 

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy Note 2 using Tapatalk 2.


----------



## Kevin K

yes Vinny and I wasn't doubting it either way, as what he said made sense based on rules, but after studying rules further, it could possibly be even in the next class. Guess we'll get that ironed out at next contest.


----------



## MacLeod

Kevin K said:


> yes Vinny and I wasn't doubting it either way, as what he said made sense based on rules, but after studying rules further, it could possibly be even in the next class. Guess we'll get that ironed out at next contest.


What was the questionable parts? Maybe somebody here can answer for ya. 

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy Note 2 using Tapatalk 2.


----------



## Kevin K

The Santa Fe has a plastic storage bin (not that usable anyway) that unbolts from the floor. I removed it and used factory bolt locations and put down some birch, mounted sub enclosure and and a raised false floor to have very usable factory like appearance. I didn't cut anything but did remove a factory piece. 
Other item was a volt meter placed in sunglass holder, again no cutting, meter just in panel that fits in holder. Just can only store one pair of glasses now instead of two.


----------



## MacLeod

If that sub is in front of the B pillars I think that's going to be Modified at minimum. Unless it's offered from the factory, you can't really replace anything for audio. The dash kit for a HU is the only exception. Everything has to look stock aside from tweeter mounts and head unit. Anything other than that is Mod and up if I'm not mistaken. 

What class did Vinny say you were in? 

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy Note 2 using Tapatalk 2.


----------



## Kevin K

all that is behind B pillars, I thought initially was stock, Vinny changed to street. 
But in rules, modified street states that removal of any item behind the B-pillars is allowed
Stock, street does not allow that......
I didn't catch that till after getting back home. So does that mean my SQL and Install points are all void now?


----------



## MacLeod

Kevin K said:


> all that is behind B pillars, I thought initially was stock, Vinny changed to street.
> But in rules, modified street states that removal of any item behind the B-pillars is allowed
> Stock, street does not allow that......
> I didn't catch that till after getting back home. So does that mean my SQL and Install points are all void now?


That is a tricky one. You did remove it but replaced it with a custom console to house your sub. It's still functional as a storage console. My initial reaction is that it's Street especially since Vinny says it is but if you wanted to get super technical I could see where it's Mod Street cause it ain't says you can't remove stuff in Street and doesn't make an exception for replacing it. Unless you read in that since you replaced it, it wasn't removed. LOL, this could go on for hours. 

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy Note 2 using Tapatalk 2.


----------



## AccordUno

thehatedguy said:


> I still don't get what is so advantagous or advanced with a compression driver for highs in and of itself that they are banned in the lower classes.



Interesting. If it's a coaxially mounted, wouldn't it be considered a coaxial speaker? does it matter if it's pro audio? Just curious, because, I know of a Beyma 8" with a compression driver that looks really tempting.


----------



## Boostedrex

AccordUno said:


> Interesting. If it's a coaxially mounted, wouldn't it be considered a coaxial speaker? does it matter if it's pro audio? Just curious, because, I know of a Beyma 8" with a compression driver that looks really tempting.


The rules specifically call out "compression drivers" in the not permitted sections for stock, street, and mod street. The tweeter in a pro-audio based coaxial speaker is a compression driver. So that would bump you up to Modified if not higher depending on speaker placement.


----------



## thehatedguy

That is the dumbest rule decision that I have seen in a long time. Who came up with that crap line of reasoning?


----------



## ErinH

thehatedguy said:


> That is the dumbest rule decision that I have seen in a long time. Who came up with that crap line of reasoning?


I kind of wonder if they didn't really intend for it to target horns but used the term compression driver rather than "horn".


----------



## thehatedguy

Then why include the term?

What's the difference between a coax that uses a compression driver in the kick or door vs. a traditional coax with a tweeter other than the type of tweeter used?


----------



## thehatedguy

So every tweeter that is advertised with a faceplate that says waveguide is now illegal in the lower classes? Cause there are more than a few tweeters with that in the description.


----------



## Boostedrex

thehatedguy said:


> Then why include the term?
> 
> What's the difference between a coax that uses a compression driver in the kick or door vs. a traditional coax with a tweeter other than the type of tweeter used?





thehatedguy said:


> So every tweeter that is advertised with a faceplate that says waveguide is now illegal in the lower classes? Cause there are more than a few tweeters with that in the description.


You make some valid points on that. Though I don't recall seeing a pro-audio coax that wasn't at least an 8" driver. Having those in your kicks would move you out of Mod Street anyway as a 6.5" driver is the largest allowed in kicks in that class. 

The tweeter waveguide thing is something I would like more clarification on. Because something like the JBL set would techincally DQ you from the lower classes if you take the rules word for word. But I don't think it should be that way IN THAT SITUATION.


----------



## ErinH

the css ld25x would as well. heck, many small flange tweeters are somewhat loaded ...


----------



## BigRed

what about the tannoy drivers that I believe have a compression driver in the center?


----------



## thehatedguy

B&C, BMS, and Beyma have 5.25 and 6.5 coaxes. Faital Pro has 6.5" coaxes.

All of the Dual Concentric Tannoys use compression drivers.


----------



## KP

If 'compression driver' was removed what coaxes with compression drivers would fit in the tweeter size rule?


----------



## AccordUno

I'm curious why can't you use compression drivers or horns in a lower class? Don't remember this being an issue, when I was judging or competing, what caused this to come about?


----------



## Mic10is

AccordUno said:


> I'm curious why can't you use compression drivers or horns in a lower class? Don't remember this being an issue, when I was judging or competing, what caused this to come about?


Previously, the lowest class it was allowed was Mod Street.

At the time, being one of the very few who still used horns, I asked why they couldnt be used in lower classes.

i was given 2 basic reasons.

the 1st reason was mounting. Typically to mount horns you need to modify or remove the factory kick panel or other areas. so Obviously, once you do that you are automatically in a higher class.

The other reason was that they were considered an unfair advantage bc of how they work. They direct sound to the opposite side and thus make it easier for staging and imaging.


----------



## MacLeod

AccordUno said:


> I'm curious why can't you use compression drivers or horns in a lower class? Don't remember this being an issue, when I was judging or competing, what caused this to come about?


Because MECA has always classified by the install and not the competitor so technically Street is not "lower" than ModEx. True the top competitors are in those classes but Steve Cook could build a Street car and compete in that class. This way the guy that can't do complex installs, and fiberglass and such (like me) still has classes they can compete in on level ground. 

So by them classifying by installs, you can't have horns in a class like Street which only allows stock speaker locations because no car comes with horns under the dash. So you have Stock and Street which are only for stock speaker locations and then the complexity of the installs go up from there. So there are a LOT of things you can't use in Stock - Mod Street. If you want to use horns you can but you just can't use them in a class that's based on stock speaker locations. 


Sent from my Samsung Galaxy Note 2 using Tapatalk 2.


----------



## thehatedguy

What do you mean? 

Nearly all compression drivers used in the car are a 1" exit. The B&C 5s and 6s have a 3/4" exit.



AcuraTLSQ said:


> If 'compression driver' was removed what coaxes with compression drivers would fit in the tweeter size rule?


----------



## thehatedguy

What car comes with kick panels from the factory?

And the rules allow for an additional tweeter to be installed in those classes.




MacLeod said:


> Because MECA has always classified by the install and not the competitor so technically Street is not "lower" than ModEx. True the top competitors are in those classes but Steve Cook could build a Street car and compete in that class. This way the guy that can't do complex installs, and fiberglass and such (like me) still has classes they can compete in on level ground.
> 
> So by them classifying by installs, you can't have horns in a class like Street which only allows stock speaker locations because no car comes with horns under the dash. So you have Stock and Street which are only for stock speaker locations and then the complexity of the installs go up from there. So there are a LOT of things you can't use in Stock - Mod Street. If you want to use horns you can but you just can't use them in a class that's based on stock speaker locations.
> 
> 
> Sent from my Samsung Galaxy Note 2 using Tapatalk 2.


----------



## KP

thehatedguy said:


> What do you mean?
> 
> Nearly all compression drivers used in the car are a 1" exit. The B&C 5s and 6s have a 3/4" exit.


The rule references dome size not 'exit'. Which coaxes could be used?


----------



## MacLeod

thehatedguy said:


> What car comes with kick panels from the factory?


None that I know of which is why they're not allowed in Stock and Street. Mod Street is stock locations but also allows kick panels. The idea is to have a smooth progression thru the classes. Stock has stock provisions and limited processing. Street adds unlimited processing. Mod Street add kick panels. Modified adds acoustic treatments and many more speaker locations. ModEx adds almost everything and Extreme is anything goes. 


> And the rules allow for an additional tweeter to be installed in those classes.


Beats me. Like I said, I don't jnderstand what has you all worked up about compression tweeters or whatever the hell they are. There are literally countless tweeters out there you can use and I don't get why you're focusing in on this one specific one that nobody uses anyway. 

Besides, if there ever was this great big ground swell of competitors wanting to use compression tweeters, chances are they'd allow them. They're evolving and changing the rules every year. 



Sent from my Samsung Galaxy Note 2 using Tapatalk 2.


----------



## thehatedguy

So stock says no waveguides or horns.

Street and Modified Street says no waveguides, horns, or compression drivers.

What's the difference between a tweeter that is no more than 2" in diameter and a small wideband driver? They are tweeters that can play really low. The Scanspeak Illuminator is larger than 2" in diameter, are they illegal now too?

You can build kicks in Modified Street in a car that didn't have them...but you can't put a set of horns under the dash? The whole "it didn't come from the factory that way" argument became null and void when you allowed the use of kickpanel locations in that class.


----------



## thehatedguy

No, it doesn't say anything about dome size...anywhere.



AcuraTLSQ said:


> The rule references dome size not 'exit'. Which coaxes could be used?


----------



## thehatedguy

Anyone that has an edgewound voicecoil that is 2" or less (since somehow the rules reference dome size not exit nor is it stated anywhere that it is dome size) since the dome size is the size of the voice coil.

Let's see, the BMS have 1.75" voice coils on their HF section of the coax.

B&C have a 1" dome.

Have to look at Beyma.

Faital Pro have a 1" voice coil on the HF driver.

Anything else?


AcuraTLSQ said:


> The rule references dome size not 'exit'. Which coaxes could be used?


----------



## thehatedguy

So are 2" wideband drivers legal? Like the Jordan JXR6s...they can play down into the hundreds of hertz range. They aren't tweeters. They and things like the Aurasound Whispers shouldn't be allowed in the lower classes.


----------



## MacLeod

thehatedguy said:


> So stock says no waveguides or horns.
> 
> Street and Modified Street says no waveguides, horns, or compression drivers.
> 
> What's the difference between a tweeter that is no more than 2" in diameter and a small wideband driver? They are tweeters that can play really low. The Scanspeak Illuminator is larger than 2" in diameter, are they illegal now too?


The Illuminators are 1" tweets. The rule has always been about the cone. You can use a home tweet that has a 4" flange so long as the tweeter itself is under 2".

As for the difference, maybe you just answered it. They can play really low. Maybe they wanted to keep it as close to stock provisions and a tweeter that can play down to 300Hz or whatever would be more like a mid so you'd be in a class that uses stock provisions but you've got basically mids know your dash like they do in Modified. Just a guess on my part but sounds like a good reason. 



> You can build kicks in Modified Street in a car that didn't have them...but you can't put a set of horns under the dash? The whole "it didn't come from the factory that way" argument became null and void when you allowed the use of kickpanel locations in that class.


So you think there should only be 2 classes? Stock which has to keep stock provisions and then the Everything Else class which allows everything? 

Going from stock to anything goes isn't a progression at all. The lines gotta be drawn somewhere. Stock to kick panels to dash speakers or horns to anything goes is a lot better progression than stock to anything goes. 



Sent from my Samsung Galaxy Note 2 using Tapatalk 2.


----------



## thehatedguy

The rules do not state anywhere anything about dome/cone size. It says "Optional pair of tweeters no more than 2 inches in diameter which may be..."

The Illunimators are nearly 2.5" in diameter...but with a 1" exit/radiating area.

How you going to put a tweeter with a 4" flange on a pillar and still make it look stock?

But there is nothing in the rules that say you can't use these "tweeters" aka 2" wideband drivers in the lower classes. AS long as they are in the stock or near stock positions, you are good to go. Nevermind these "tweeters" have a Fs of about 100-150 hertz.


----------



## BigRed

I believe the 2" rule for tweeters is based on whatever the manufacturer calls it in size. So the illuminator would be allowed


----------



## thehatedguy

But that is what I am saying...nowhere in the rules does it say what size they are talking about. Like Kirk trying the whole "it's not exit size" thing...doesn't say that.


----------



## MacLeod

thehatedguy said:


> The rules do not state anywhere anything about dome/cone size. It says "Optional pair of tweeters no more than 2 inches in diameter which may be..."
> 
> The Illunimators are nearly 2.5" in diameter...but with a 1" exit/radiating area.
> 
> How you going to put a tweeter with a 4" flange on a pillar and still make it look stock?
> 
> But there is nothing in the rules that say you can't use these "tweeters" aka 2" wideband drivers in the lower classes. AS long as they are in the stock or near stock positions, you are good to go. Nevermind these "tweeters" have a Fs of about 100-150 hertz.


You're right that the rules don't say the cone area but since my first MECA show in 2005, it's the cone area that is what they're looking at. I ran those LPG tweets for a while and they have nearly a 3" flange and they were allowed. 

I bet that next year the rules will specifically say cone area since you brought this up and it is a valid point. However I do not think they'll ever allow any "tweeter" that can play down to 150Hz in Stock and Street class because anything that can play down that low ain't a tweeter, it's a mid. 


Sent from my Samsung Galaxy Note 2 using Tapatalk 2.


----------



## Mic10is

thehatedguy said:


> What car comes with kick panels from the factory?
> 
> And the rules allow for an additional tweeter to be installed in those classes.


BMW E36 come with factory Kick panels that work pretty damn well.


----------



## MacLeod

Mic10is said:


> BMW E36 come with factory Kick panels that work pretty damn well.


BMW's just sound good naturally. You could toss some 6x9's on the rear deck and they'd be awesome. 

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy Note 2 using Tapatalk 2.


----------



## thehatedguy

I'm not trying to be an ass about this stuff...just a lot of gray area and backwards thinking.

If these things are not addressed specifically, you could have 3 judges have three seperate responses...and/or get DQed at Finals.

Like Kirk saying the compression driver is about the diaphram size...I consider it exit size since the sound is coming from a 1" appature. So who is right? We are both judges. The rules do not state anywhere implictly that they are referencing diaphram size.

I agree that they are mids...but I think you might find them being called tweeters.

What worked for a small organization in terms of implied meanings of things when you had 5 judges in the whole country is a bit different than what needs to happen in a national/multinational level company. If you do not address these things in the rulebook and be very specific about them, then you leave it open to the judges...who have probably never met or had a joint training to get them all dialed in. If you don't, then you will have all sorts of bad happening when you all come together.




MacLeod said:


> You're right that the rules don't say the cone area but since my first MECA show in 2005, it's the cone area that is what they're looking at. I ran those LPG tweets for a while and they have nearly a 3" flange and they were allowed.
> 
> I bet that next year the rules will specifically say cone area since you brought this up and it is a valid point. However I do not think they'll ever allow any "tweeter" that can play down to 150Hz in Stock and Street class because anything that can play down that low ain't a tweeter, it's a mid.
> 
> 
> Sent from my Samsung Galaxy Note 2 using Tapatalk 2.


----------



## thehatedguy

Always the exception to the norm...pretty much every BMW has some kickpanel mounted speakers.

So, for the people in MECA and want to compete Stock, get a BMW and have a natural unfair advantage. 



Mic10is said:


> BMW E36 come with factory Kick panels that work pretty damn well.


----------



## chefhow

Some older MB models have kicks.
Lincoln MKZ and Lincoln LS both have factory subs in the center console passenger side. 
Ford has some older economy models that have kicks like the Festiva, Fiesta, and older Escorts.


----------



## thehatedguy

Ok, so I was a little off in the kickpanels being factory equiptment.


----------



## MacLeod

thehatedguy said:


> I'm not trying to be an ass about this stuff...just a lot of gray area and backwards thinking.
> 
> If these things are not addressed specifically, you could have 3 judges have three seperate responses...and/or get DQed at Finals.
> 
> Like Kirk saying the compression driver is about the diaphram size...I consider it exit size since the sound is coming from a 1" appature. So who is right? We are both judges. The rules do not state anywhere implictly that they are referencing diaphram size.
> 
> I agree that they are mids...but I think you might find them being called tweeters.
> 
> What worked for a small organization in terms of implied meanings of things when you had 5 judges in the whole country is a bit different than what needs to happen in a national/multinational level company. If you do not address these things in the rulebook and be very specific about them, then you leave it open to the judges...who have probably never met or had a joint training to get them all dialed in. If you don't, then you will have all sorts of bad happening when you all come together.


I agree with ya on that and I'm sure they will. They cleared up the gray areas last year with the flush mounted tweeters in Stock and Street. This issue has never been brought up as far as I know but now that it has, they'll probably clear it up in next year's revision. 

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy Note 2 using Tapatalk 2.


----------



## thehatedguy

And it wouldn't take much changing of the wording to do it with regards to the tweeters. Just add "diaphram size" must not be 2 inches....

And remove compression drivers from the not allowed list as to include the coaxes/point sources. You can keep the horns on the not allowed list in the bottom two classes.


----------



## AccordUno

MacLeod said:


> Because MECA has always classified by the install and not the competitor so technically Street is not "lower" than ModEx. True the top competitors are in those classes but Steve Cook could build a Street car and compete in that class. This way the guy that can't do complex installs, and fiberglass and such (like me) still has classes they can compete in on level ground.
> 
> Sent from my Samsung Galaxy Note 2 using Tapatalk 2.


I predate you and Mic on MECA, so I don't recall horns being a issue, must have been after I stopped.. 

I understand what you are saying but by blocking certain speakers, it doesn't make sense, but i'm not running horns or point source speakers.. and I'm also not shooting to be in the lower classes..


----------



## MacLeod

AccordUno said:


> I predate you and Mic on MECA, so I don't recall horns being a issue, must have been after I stopped..
> 
> I understand what you are saying but by blocking certain speakers, it doesn't make sense, but i'm not running horns or point source speakers.. and I'm also not shooting to be in the lower classes..


All I know is that they weren't allowed since I've been in MECA since 2005. Come to think of it, the first car I ever saw with horns was Mic's back at 07 finals. Weren't you in ModEx that year Mic? I can't think of anybody before that.

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy Note 2 using Tapatalk 2.


----------



## thehatedguy

Probably was the first car in MECA to use them. For some reason the minimonitors on top of your dash were popular back in the day in MECA...hell when IASCA and MECA had a joint Finals I can't recall seeing kickpanels in the MECA cars. There was definitly a different approach to things from each organization back then.


----------



## Kevin K

wow, huge tweeter discussion, and all I had to deal with was a storage bin, sounds minor now.....


----------



## AccordUno

thehatedguy said:


> Probably was the first car in MECA to use them. For some reason the minimonitors on top of your dash were popular back in the day in MECA...hell when IASCA and MECA had a joint Finals I can't recall seeing kickpanels in the MECA cars. There was definitly a different approach to things from each organization back then.


There were a few cars with kicks back in the day, I forgot his name (white CRX w/Dynaudio gear beat me).. I had midbass in the kicks, so did Brad (Accord and MB) 

BUt things have changed quite a bit and I guess I'll have to adapt and come out running..


----------



## MacLeod

I dunno, I still like kicks. Some of the best systems I've ever heard have been with kicks. 

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy Note 2 using Tapatalk 2.


----------



## thehatedguy

Oh lord...what's the fellows name with the CRX...has Dynaudio in it and from North Carolina. Tall very skinny guy. His are in the floor now (I think). Great sounding car when I heard it a couple of years back.

I thought Brad's Benz had the midbasses in the doors...maybe they were in the kicks. Something was in the doors, maybe the midranges? That car sounded good.


----------



## dietDrThunder

Unbelievable. I spent the rest of the year cooling off after my dash-mounted tweeter debacle, and was looking forward to coming back this year in a new car, fully expecting that the horrible rule book would have been addressed. I just looked at the 2013 rules (street), and what do you know? The worst blunder in there is still there, in tact. Horrible.










To revisit...to say that you can flush, surface, or custom mount in pods is not a meaningful statement unless it means that you can flush mount, surface mount, or pod mount tweeters. I found out the hard way that it mysteriously does not mean that. It actually means that you can flush mount tweeters in pods, surface mount tweeters in pods, or custom mount tweeters in pods. Surface mount in pods? What does that even mean? Flush mount? Does that mean the pod is flush?

Or maybe it means that as long as you don't violate the prohibited items, you can actually flush mount or surface mount or pod mount your extra tweeters. Ok, so if that's the case, how can you add extra tweeters, flush mount them, but not cut any metal or plastic? Where would you put them? The OEM spot isn't intended, as the rule exists specifically to allow for an extra tweeters.

Ugh...it made no sense before, it still makes no sense. Nice work MECA rules committee.

Oh, and for those who don't know what happened, here is a recap. I asked Steve Stern (the owner and pres) before I flush mounted my tweeters if my interpretation of that part of the rules was right, that I could add OEM-looking flushed tweets in my dash. he said he thought it fit the rule, but referred me to Vic to confirm. He said the same thing, but wanted to see it to be sure. So I took the plunge, cut my dash, and flushed the tweets. At the next show, Steve and Vic both looked at my car, and both said that it was legal. Vic went so far as to have a conversation with me explaining that the intent of the rule was that since tweeters come with simple hardware to flush mount them, they wanted to make sure that the rules allowed basic utilization of same. Great.

Then I mention it on here, some people whine and *****, and mysteriously when I show up at the next show Steve tells me that he was wrong (?) and the install is not legal. Sorry...thanks for playing.


----------



## pocket5s

the way I read that is you can add the tweeters as directed. if that means cutting plastic, etc. so be it. what you can cut is other metal, plastic, dash, etc. that is not for the sole purpose of accommodating those tweeters. Like turning your dash into a big grill. or cutting metal for IB installs of midbass/midranges, things like that. 

The "Permitted items excluded" is what permits my definition of that


----------



## pocket5s

I see you added to your post for the back story. Yea, that is BS there. the rule specifically says "flush mounting" of the tweeters. I don't think it is right to tell someone yes, then no, in the middle of the season.


----------



## dietDrThunder

pocket5s said:


> the way I read that is you can add the tweeters as directed. if that means cutting plastic, etc. so be it. what you can cut is other metal, plastic, dash, etc. that is not for the sole purpose of accommodating those tweeters. Like turning your dash into a big grill. or cutting metal for IB installs of midbass/midranges, things like that.
> 
> The "Permitted items excluded" is what permits my definition of that


Ya you'd think so. Not correct. I was told (the second time around) that under no circumstances was cutting of the dash in any way allowed in Street. I asked "then what does this rule mean?" Steve replied that it was "a mistake" and would be fixed.

Not fixed.


----------



## pocket5s

I would bring it up to Matt or whoever else is on the rules committee before it gets too far then.


----------



## Mic10is

MacLeod said:


> All I know is that they weren't allowed since I've been in MECA since 2005. Come to think of it, the first car I ever saw with horns was Mic's back at 07 finals. Weren't you in ModEx that year Mic? I can't think of anybody before that.
> 
> Sent from my Samsung Galaxy Note 2 using Tapatalk 2.


I did one MECA event in 06, Steel Valley Regional, just bc it was there. My 1st season competing in MECA was 2009. I did not run horns. In 2010 I won Extreme using horns but the car would have easily fit into Modex.
I did not compete from July 06 til August 09 in any organization


----------



## MacLeod

Mic10is said:


> I did one MECA event in 06, Steel Valley Regional, just bc it was there. My 1st season competing in MECA was 2009. I did not run horns. In 2010 I won Extreme using horns but the car would have easily fit into Modex.
> I did not compete from July 06 til August 09 in any organization


Who the hell was that then? It was some dude in a red car and I could've sworn it was you. When I talked to you at last year's freezefest I knew I'd met you before but I guess that was 09 finals and my tiny brain was making me think it was 07. 

Man I gotta lay off the crack. 

As for the tweeters in the dash, as I understand it, you can NOT flush mount them in the dash in Street or even Mod Street and I'm not sure about Modified. The exception would be if it's a small removable panel in the corners that could easily be replaced for $5 at a junk yard. Cutting a 2" hole in the dash can't be returned to stock. I don't necessarily agree with that but it has been settled to the best of my knowledge. 

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy Note 2 using Tapatalk 2.


----------



## d3adl1fter

thehatedguy said:


> Oh lord...what's the fellows name with the CRX...has Dynaudio in it and from North Carolina. Tall very skinny guy. His are in the floor now (I think). Great sounding car when I heard it a couple of years back.
> 
> I thought Brad's Benz had the midbasses in the doors...maybe they were in the kicks. Something was in the doors, maybe the midranges? That car sounded good.


crx = David Timmerman


----------



## Mic10is

MacLeod said:


> Who the hell was that then? It was some dude in a red car and I could've sworn it was you. When I talked to you at last year's freezefest I knew I'd met you before but I guess that was 09 finals and my tiny brain was making me think it was 07.
> 
> Man I gotta lay off the crack.
> 
> As for the tweeters in the dash, as I understand it, you can NOT flush mount them in the dash in Street or even Mod Street and I'm not sure about Modified. The exception would be if it's a small removable panel in the corners that could easily be replaced for $5 at a junk yard. Cutting a 2" hole in the dash can't be returned to stock. I don't necessarily agree with that but it has been settled to the best of my knowledge.
> 
> Sent from my Samsung Galaxy Note 2 using Tapatalk 2.


There was a red 4dr BMW that Tony Pasquale built. I have no idea what his name was. I me him at SVR in 06. Has mini horns and Jl IB8s.


----------



## dietDrThunder

pocket5s said:


> I see you added to your post for the back story. Yea, that is BS there. the rule specifically says "flush mounting" of the tweeters. I don't think it is right to tell someone yes, then no, in the middle of the season.


Ya me either. That's why I haven't been back.


----------



## bertholomey

d3adl1fter said:


> crx = David Timmerman


Fantastic system - does have the Dyns in the floor.


----------



## Kevin K

dietDrThunder, you say you never been back, do you compete with any org or just enjoy the audio as is?


----------



## PHD - USA

MacLeod said:


> Yeah, if you change classes, your points don't go with you. I'm ok with that. That way you don't sandbag in a lower class all year then jump to a higher class.
> 
> Sent from my Samsung Galaxy Note 2 using Tapatalk 2.


You can petition to get your points transferred.


----------



## chefhow

I don't think the rules are that difficult to understand, Stock is exactly that STOCK, nothing outside out stock/OEM locations and no processing outside of what is offered in all HU's but the P99 HU.
Street affords you the same as stock except you can add external processing and you can flush mount a set of tweeters to an A Pillar or sail panel, no cutting of the dash. 
I don't see the problem.


----------



## Kevin K

I just talked to Steve and believe I would actually be in modified street after discussing rules and way car is setup. 
Hopefully that will be the way it is agreed on by everyone and maybe points will be changed over.


----------



## PHD - USA

chefhow said:


> I don't think the rules are that difficult to understand, Stock is exactly that STOCK, nothing outside out stock/OEM locations and no processing outside of what is offered in all HU's but the P99 HU.
> Street affords you the same as stock except you can add external processing and you can flush mount a set of tweeters to an A Pillar or sail panel, no cutting of the dash.
> I don't see the problem.


You can flush mount tweeters in the a pillars and sail panels in stock now also


----------



## chefhow

Ge_off_me said:


> You can flush mount tweeters in the a pillars and sail panels in stock now also


Then riddle me this...

WHAT IS THE PROBLEM? It is VERY clear in its definition and IMO there are no gray areas unless you want to find one.


----------



## PHD - USA

chefhow said:


> Then riddle me this...
> 
> WHAT IS THE PROBLEM? It is VERY clear in its definition and IMO there are no gray areas unless you want to find one.


I agree with you, I have no problems with the rules at all. 

I'm sure you know this just as well as I, that when there is somebody that wants to cause drama, they will cause it anyway they can.


----------



## MacLeod

Ge_off_me said:


> You can petition to get your points transferred.


I don't think you can. I went to Freezefest in 2010 originally in Street but Steve Cook talked me into adding some mids in the A pillars and going to Modified. I asked Steve Stern if I decided to do that could I take my points I would get that day with me and he said no. So I had to change my class to Mod that day even tho I had a Street setup. 

I'll ask but I think I know the answer. It's my fault really cause I got lazy and didn't want to cut any more metal than I had to so I'd have an easier time of fitting the OEM speakers back on when I traded my Accord in. I should have done it right the first time so I can't really blame anybody.

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy Note 2 using Tapatalk 2.


----------



## PHD - USA

MacLeod said:


> I don't think you can. I went to Freezefest in 2010 originally in Street but Steve Cook talked me into adding some mids in the A pillars and going to Modified. I asked Steve Stern if I decided to do that could I take my points I would get that day with me and he said no. So I had to change my class to Mod that day even tho I had a Street setup.
> 
> I'll ask but I think I know the answer. It's my fault really cause I got lazy and didn't want to cut any more metal than I had to so I'd have an easier time of fitting the OEM speakers back on when I traded my Accord in. I should have done it right the first time so I can't really blame anybody.
> 
> Sent from my Samsung Galaxy Note 2 using Tapatalk 2.


I also talked to Steve and look into the rulebook.


----------



## thehatedguy

I can find the gray areas


----------



## pocket5s

"easily replaceable" is a relative term  some vehicle's dash pads/covers are just as easily replaced as A-pillars or doors.


----------



## bigbubba

IMOPO if you make a change that clearly puts you in a different class from where you originally started, petitioning to have your current points earned transferred should not be allowed. Now, if the judges made a mistake and put you in a class you shouldn't have been in a caught the mistake the next time, one could argue to transfer your points due to no fault of your own. That last issue happened to me.


----------



## chefhow

You are all looking for problems or gray areas. 
If you read the rules for what they are and not for what you want or would like for them to be to best suit your needs then I would respectfully disagree with all of you.
This is 100% better than ANYTHING that has been presented to us by MECA in past years and 100% easier to read, understand and decifer than anything in the past.


----------



## thehatedguy

But a tweeter that is no larger than 2 inches...diaphram or physical size? Cause it's hard to make a tweeter much larger than 2" in physical diameter look stock on a pillar that is 3" wide.

And the whole compression driver thing...makes no sense.


----------



## chefhow

thehatedguy said:


> But a tweeter that is no larger than 2 inches...diaphram or physical size? Cause it's hard to make a tweeter much larger than 2" in physical diameter look stock on a pillar that is 3" wide.
> 
> And the whole compression driver thing...makes no sense.


Ask Matt about the tweeter question, the way I am looking at it is the diaphram size, anything larger is now either a mid range or a wide band driver.

The compression driver issue... I cant help you but I do agree.


----------



## thehatedguy

The tweeter thing just needs a couple of words in the rules that state either physically 2 inches or a diaphram of 2 inches. And that would be golden with no room for misunderstanding.


----------



## chefhow

thehatedguy said:


> The tweeter thing just needs a couple of words in the rules that state either physically 2 inches or a diaphram of 2 inches. And that would be golden with no room for misunderstanding.


Send the idea and wording you have to Matt R.


----------



## Matt R

If the manufacturer calls it a 2 inch or smaller it is permitted
Just have to integrate it.

The horn rule is carried over from past years we did allow it in lower classthan last year


----------



## chefhow

Matt R said:


> If the manufacturer calls it a 2 inch or smaller it is permitted


2" by overall size or by the diameter of the cone/diaphram is the question that would need to be answered.


----------



## Mic10is

Matt R said:


> If the manufacturer calls it a 2 inch or smaller it is permitted
> Just have to integrate it.
> 
> The horn rule is carried over from past years we did allow it in lower classthan last year


Horns were allowed in Mod Street for the past 3 years. Now it is only allowed in Modified and up.


----------



## MacLeod

chefhow said:


> 2" by overall size or by the diameter of the cone/diaphram is the question that would need to be answered.


My guess would be whatever the manufacturer calls it. Like those LPG's I ran, those are 1" tweeters even tho they have a 3" flange. They don't actually measure anything on the tweeter, they just go by what Scanspeak or Vifa or whoever call it on the package. 

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy Note 2 using Tapatalk 2.


----------



## thehatedguy

So why the big fuss about the diaphram size of a compression driver that has a 1" exit?


----------



## MacLeod

thehatedguy said:


> So why the big fuss about the diaphram size of a compression driver that has a 1" exit?


Well technically there wasn't a fuss til you started this compression crusade about 2 days ago. 

Like I said brother, I don't know anybody that uses them or anybody that has wanted to. It may just be as simple as that as to why it never came up. They didn't want stock cars running "tweeters" that could play lower than a 3" mid and the coaxes just got caught in the crossfire. And since nobody ever used them, they never got discussed further. 

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy Note 2 using Tapatalk 2.


----------



## thehatedguy

Hate to exclude potential competitors for something like that...and was legal years before.

All it would take would be to remove the phrase "compression driver" so to include coaxes in the kicks. Plus the phrase "compression driver" isn't mentioned in stock with waveguide/horn, but included in the next two classes...which if you read the rules literally, it would mean you could use coaxes with compression drivers in the first class, but not the two after that.

It's not congruent...like it lacked proof reading before being published.


----------



## Matt R

chefhow said:


> 2" by overall size or by the diameter of the cone/diaphram is the question that would need to be answered.


It is what Aaron said, if I look up the speaker from the manufacturer and they call it a 2 inch driver then its good. Wide band, tweeter, whatever. The part that is a judgement call is, if its integrated or "provides a factory look" That is going to be up to the verification judge. If there is a question about a specific install, people can send a pic to the R&E committe and we can all discuss it. 



Mic10is said:


> Horns were allowed in Mod Street for the past 3 years. Now it is only allowed in Modified and up.


Hey Mic, if thats the case then we made a mistake. That wasn't the intent. I thought the horn rule was for Modex up in the past.



MacLeod said:


> My guess would be whatever the manufacturer calls it. Like those LPG's I ran, those are 1" tweeters even tho they have a 3" flange. They don't actually measure anything on the tweeter, they just go by what Scanspeak or Vifa or whoever call it on the package.
> 
> Sent from my Samsung Galaxy Note 2 using Tapatalk 2.


Correct!!!!!!


----------



## Matt R

thehatedguy said:


> Hate to exclude potential competitors for something like that...and was legal years before.
> 
> All it would take would be to remove the phrase "compression driver" so to include coaxes in the kicks. Plus the phrase "compression driver" isn't mentioned in stock with waveguide/horn, but included in the next two classes...which if you read the rules literally, it would mean you could use coaxes with compression drivers in the first class, but not the two after that.
> 
> It's not congruent...like it lacked proof reading before being published.


I do agree, I dont think we intended to not allow a compression driver based coax in any class. I think having wave guide/hornloading is what is intended. I'll see if we can clarify in the rule book.

We completely changed the format of the rule book this year. That took a ton of work and thought about how to go about it.

MECA's r&e committe truely has a democratic process with lots of debate. It takes a good bit of time to get everyones opinioins before the decisions are made.

There are some errors that could be more clear. The new format really challenged us to make things consistent, it didnt work 100%. Hopefully with feedback like this we can get things right, we havent thought of every single scenario.

The intent of the rules for almost all classes did not change. Modex and modified were the only classes that had major clarifications made. Pod sizes, dash cutting, and pillar sizes mostly.

You planning to compete this year Jay?


----------



## chefhow

Thanks Matt!!


----------



## thehatedguy

Man I was really planning on it. The wife's car died and I had to use nearly all of our tax refund to get her a new one, so my stereo budget not nixed...but really trying to put something together.

Rules and rulebooks need to be written in such a way that Joe Schmoe off the street can read it and understand not only the rules as they are written, but the intent of the rule. Also they need to be written in a manner in which if a dispute comes up, you can go back to the book and say, "It says it right here." In the case of the tweeters, the way the rules are written doesn't align up with the intent. Sure, we know the intent of the meaning being we on this site know a little about speakers. But the organization and judges have no way of covering their tails if a dispute ever came to be over such a thing.

As far as the compression driver thing, I really doubt too many people are hot on those and would use them. I know I have been looking at them for various reasons, but really not too many people are doing the same. The reasoning behind the decision didn't make sense given what you are allowed to do and have in those classes. It's like penalizing them over their speaker choice/preferencs...most people who use those kinds of drivers don't talk about diaphram size, but the exit size. To me a 1" exit is a 1" driver.


----------



## Matt R

The way the rule book was written before was a good bit more confusing. You would have to know the rules to all the classes to tell where your car fits.

Changing the format to what we currently have is a great step in the right direction imo. 

This is my first year on the R&E committe and there is a process that the rules have to go through. I know the rule book isnt perfect but its heading down the right road. 

In case you didnt know, the R&E committe is made up of all volunteers and takes a good bit of time to get the job done. MECA is still a car club and it takes alot of effort from its members to help make it all happen. 

The goal is to make the rule book as black and white as possible. All we can do is try to address all the possible scinarios that we are seeing at competitions. Then guess what else people are going to do or try to do. For example, we limited the size of pillar build outs in antisipation of something huge showing up that will take up half the windshield.

Anyways, we're doing the best we can and will look into making some more clarifications.
We need as much feedback as possible to be able to catch these problems.


----------



## thehatedguy

As long as you guys keep listening to the grumbling fromnthe peanut gallery it's all good.


----------



## Matt R

Well yeah, thats why they want people that care to be involved. So we can make it better. 

The thing to keep in mind that I mentioned before is MECA is a car club. The members have a voice and help to steer the club in the direction they want it to go. 

The tough part is to make rules that will keep the classes competitive and have a progression in SOUND as you go up in class. Having knowledge of what makes a particular type of install sound better or have an advantage over another type is important.


----------



## Matt R

thehatedguy said:


> As long as you guys keep listening to the grumbling fromnthe peanut gallery it's all good.


Now, get a membership and start competing!


----------



## pocket5s

pocket5s said:


> I have a comment/question regarding SQ2 classification. It seems it would be more fair to have SQ2 be up to modified and have SQ2+ cars be Modex and up.
> 
> The thinking is that if you look at scores for 2012 finals, 1st place for Street, Mod Street and Modified are all pretty close. 1st place in Street would have taken 2nd place in Modified.
> 
> Now, look at the point spread between Modified and Modex, and it is an 8 point spread. Yes, those are all 1 seat scores but given the modifications allowed, it seems logical that it should be applied to 2 seat.
> 
> I realize 2 seat isn't exactly popular, but perhaps more might give it a shot if they didn't have to compete directly with Mark, Kirk, etc. without the cutting of metal that is allowed via Modex and up?
> 
> maybe something to think about for 2014.


Any thoughts on this Matt? There is one competitor in my area that did sq2 last season, but is now in modified due to a sub relocation and is no longer going to do sq2 due to being moved up to sq2+.


----------



## dietDrThunder

Kevin K said:


> dietDrThunder, you say you never been back, do you compete with any org or just enjoy the audio as is?


No that episode pretty much told me everything I needed to know about MECA and there isn't much apart from them near me, so that's that.

When I first posted about this (Mic I think...) someone replied to my post saying that (I'm praraphrasing, but only barely) if I was going to go through my time with MECA expecting to be able to follow the letter of the rule book, I was in for a rough go. I refused to believe this, but I was 100% wrong.

He was right.


----------



## Kevin K

Well sorry to hear that a couple of folks and their mistakes are gonna rob you of the fun of competing. Matt's post sounds like they are making progress and want feedback to make things better. My emails and conversations with Steve yield the same feeling. 
I used to compete in IASCA and USACi over 20 years ago and things were really different but like everything else, things progress and change sometimes those are for better sometimes seems worse.
Maybe giving it another shot would be worthwhile.




dietDrThunder said:


> No that episode pretty much told me everything I needed to know about MECA and there isn't much apart from them near me, so that's that.
> 
> When I first posted about this (Mic I think...) someone replied to my post saying that (I'm praraphrasing, but only barely) if I was going to go through my time with MECA expecting to be able to follow the letter of the rule book, I was in for a rough go. I refused to believe this, but I was 100% wrong.
> 
> He was right.


----------



## highly

Personally I am finding the new rules rather liberating...












-T


----------



## pocket5s

I triple dog dare you to do that...


----------



## ErinH

I'm pretty sure he dared himself. Lol.


----------



## pionkej

Viola'....up front bass!


----------



## thehatedguy

Todd posts up a teaser picture and now he can not NOT do it.


----------



## michaelsil1

highly said:


> Personally I am finding the new rules rather liberating...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -T


----------



## AccordUno

Matt R said:


> Now, get a membership and start competing!


Yeah, what he said.. <runs for cover> :laugh:


----------



## papasin

Matt R said:


> This wording is intended to have a bit of discression and verification judges can make a determination. I think a bit of common sense is the key.
> 
> We have basically determined a 4 inch driver is as big as modified can go on the dash/pillar area. If someone shows up with 5-6-7 inch drivers in the pillars, that would obviously be above the modified rules.
> 
> I havent seen too many pillars with anything bigger than a 4 inch driver that looked anywhere near integraded into the car. I personally wouldnt do a driver bigger than a 3 in a pillar.


Looks to me that larger than a 4 inch driver based on the rules I looked at today is out for not only Modified but MODEX too in A-pillars. Noticed also some changes in Modified, namely:

Under requirements, this was added (was not there before):
MECA approved audio tracks will be used for judging. CDs or competitor provided USB flash drives or Ipods are allowed.
Finals will be judged using judging materials of the highest possible quality.

In "permitted", this was added:
Minor plastic cutting under factory grills in dash (not visible)

In "Not Permitted", this was called out:
A-pillar mods protruding more than 3.5 inches from the factory surface
A-pillar mods with drivers larger than 4 inches

I don't think I'm affected by this, but wondering if anyone else is? And I guess a question I have is if you are affected by these updates and have already collected points, what happens to those points?


----------



## ErinH

papasin said:


> In "Not Permitted", this was called out:
> A-pillar mods protruding more than 3.5 inches from the factory surface
> *A-pillar mods with drivers larger than 4 inches*



ummm.... not cool. Where was this last month? Not in the rulebook. That's for sure. And literally just before SBN? 

I knew the rules had been updated for the 2013 season. Therefore, when I decided to go with the new drivers/pillar install a few weeks ago, I made sure to stay within the bounds of the new rules just so I wouldn't have to worry about anything. Already competed and got approved in Modex @ Freeze Fest a couple weeks ago. Now I'm in Extreme? 

I must say, I'm not very happy right now. On a scale of 1 to 10, with 10 being the most pissed off, I'm about a solid 6. I'll deal with it... I'll still compete but I'm not happy about it. Especially considering the fact I made certain I fell within the rules as they were written last month when I rebuilt my pillars and now am up a class thanks to a recent change. Yea... that's right. I'm complaining for a legitimate reason.


Anyone care to explain why this change was made and why it was made so recently? Because I know as of February 9th, this wasn't in the rulebook. Otherwise Matt would have put me in Extreme that day. I understand things happen but how many different revisions of the rulebook does there need to be? Are there going to be more changes? Hey, maybe if I just wait it out, I'll get bumped down to Street.  


*Recap*: If I'm in Extreme, I'm in Extreme. If my install had put me there by the rulebook last month then that would have been fine. My issue is the rule book did *not *have this *new* addition to the rules under which I adhered to and competed already for this 2013 season no less than 3 weeks ago.


----------



## DAT

Yikes, glad I'm waiting... Not sure If I wanna kick butt in Extreme or ModEX.....

 Just kidding around, but as it seems I'll be in Extreme.... Unless I can get my Pillars smaller...


----------



## highly

That seems a strange step. If that rule stands, it seems to me that Extreme needs to have rules added that define the limits of the next stage or competitor growth. As it stands the only difference between Extreme and Masters is your affiliation with the 12v industry, and now there is a huge leap from the car you can build in ModEx and the car you can build in Extreme. This seems to cause more disparity than it cures.

Just an observation as I have no horse in this race - I'm deeply entrenched in Extreme either way, and depending on the changes that could get applied at Extreme based on my recommendation I could well be pushed to Masters. It seems more reasonable to revisit the reasoning behind this rule but I'm not fussed either way.

As a rule change it seems to upset the balance quite a bit though.


----------



## papasin

highly said:


> As it stands the only difference between Extreme and Masters is your affiliation with the 12v industry


From the way I read it, it also looks like Extreme your car actually has to be drivable, whereas for Masters, it doesn't. :surprised:


----------



## pocket5s

It seems the intent was to prevent pods that obstructed view. However it seems they could have accomplished that with the 3.5" or 4" from pillar rule alone. I recall you had a pic of the particular measurement. 

As a side note, it also seems to leave open the question of if you can have a tweeter with that 4" driver. I assume so, but never know


----------



## highly

papasin said:


> From the way I read it, it also looks like Extreme your car actually has to be drivable, whereas for Masters, it doesn't. :surprised:


Though I agree that to be a difference, it really isn't one that is capitalized by anyone. Even the NASCAR is street legal...


----------



## Darth SQ

pocket5s said:


> It seems the intent was to prevent pods that obstructed view. However it seems they could have accomplished that with the 3.5" or 4" from pillar rule alone. I recall you had a pic of the particular measurement.
> 
> As a side note, it also seems to leave open the question of if you can have a tweeter with that 4" driver. I assume so, but never know


We had this debate at the last MECA event in Sacramento.
Papasin believes the 4" driver rule is cumulative between the midrange and tweeter where I believe it applies separately to each, so I agree with your assumption as well.
It sure would be nice to get this rule issue resolved once and for all in this thread.


Bret
PPI-ART COLLECTOR


----------



## slade1274

*glad to live in Florida where all comps are too far away*


----------



## pionkej

Since I was also already in Extreme I also have nothing to gain or lose by this change. 

What strikes me as odd is the timing. MECA is based in the southeast and in the southeast there are three "major" regular season shows: Freezefest, SBN, and the Vinny. By changing the rules a second time after Freezefest and right before SBN (where people have possibly traveled a VERY long way to attend), MECA is "pulling the rug" out from under a lot of people. 

That is surely not going to sit well with a lot of people and, being in a "niche" hobby that is trying to grow its numbers, it just doesn't seem like a prudent move from a business standpoint alone. 

No matter the outcome, I certainly hope people who got bumped, but received points in a previously appropriate class, are allowed to carry those points with them to the new class. That, at minimum, seems fair.


----------



## papasin

PPI-ART COLLECTOR said:


> We had this debate at the last MECA event in Sacramento.
> Papasin believes the 4" driver rule is cumulative between the midrange and tweeter where I believe it applies separately to each, so I agree with your assumption as well.
> It sure would be nice to get this rule issue resolved once and for all in this thread.
> 
> 
> Bret
> PPI-ART COLLECTOR


Bret,

I have nothing to gain/lose given my choices in speakers and where I mount them, but it was the SoCal folks who had to make changes to their setups who were the ones who posed concern. My interpretation is more or less irrelevant . To be precise, if you recall our discussion, it was with respect to pods vs. the 4" driver in the pillar which is a recent "clarification". The pillar rule isn't covered in as much detail as the pods (hint hint  ) whether it is cumulative or not.

To recap, we were discussing John's pods and the reason he dropped them because the rules actually do call out with specificity what is allowed and isn't in Modified with respect to pods:

· Dash pods with up to a 4 inch driver
· Dash pods can be up to 4.5 inches in size (i.e. height, width) from factory surfaces (e.g. corner of dash). The depth of the pods can be from the face of the dash to the windshield.

So the crux is if you include a tweeter with a 4" driver in a pod, unless a tweeter is less than half an inch and you trim all the mounting flanges, no way it's going to be a 4.5" pod. So to have a pod with a 4" driver, what it seems to me is your only option is a 4" with an integrated point source and a pod less than .25" in thickness all around to achieve the 4.5" restriction. The 4" pillar rule just came out so that was not the point of our discussion, so I defer to others to seek/get the clarification .

- Richard


----------



## MacLeod

bikinpunk said:


> ummm.... not cool. Where was this last month? Not in the rulebook. That's for sure. And literally just before SBN?
> 
> I knew the rules had been updated for the 2013 season. Therefore, when I decided to go with the new drivers/pillar install a few weeks ago, I made sure to stay within the bounds of the new rules just so I wouldn't have to worry about anything. Already competed and got approved in Modex @ Freeze Fest a couple weeks ago. Now I'm in Extreme?
> 
> I must say, I'm not very happy right now. On a scale of 1 to 10, with 10 being the most pissed off, I'm about a solid 6. I'll deal with it... I'll still compete but I'm not happy about it. Especially considering the fact I made certain I fell within the rules as they were written last month when I rebuilt my pillars and now am up a class thanks to a recent change. Yea... that's right. I'm complaining for a legitimate reason.
> 
> 
> Anyone care to explain why this change was made and why it was made so recently? Because I know as of February 9th, this wasn't in the rulebook. Otherwise Matt would have put me in Extreme that day. I understand things happen but how many different revisions of the rulebook does there need to be? Are there going to be more changes? Hey, maybe if I just wait it out, I'll get bumped down to Street.
> 
> 
> *Recap*: If I'm in Extreme, I'm in Extreme. If my install had put me there by the rulebook last month then that would have been fine. My issue is the rule book did *not *have this *new* addition to the rules under which I adhered to and competed already for this 2013 season no less than 3 weeks ago.


I gotta agree with ya Erin. If this rule was NOT in there when they released the rules, then they shouldn't change it. That aint cool especially this close to SBN. Once the rules are published, that should be it. Don't go changing things up or adding things like that thatll bump people out of ModEx into the anything goes class. If your pods were legal for ModEx at Freezefest, then they should be legal all year.


----------



## Darth SQ

papasin said:


> Bret,
> 
> I have nothing to gain/lose given my choices in speakers and where I mount them, but it was the SoCal folks who had to make changes to their setups who were the ones who posed concern. My interpretation is more or less irrelevant . To be precise, if you recall our discussion, it was with respect to pods vs. the 4" driver in the pillar which is a recent "clarification". The pillar rule isn't covered in as much detail as the pods (hint hint  ) whether it is cumulative or not.
> 
> To recap, we were discussing John's pods and the reason he dropped them because the rules actually do call out with specificity what is allowed and isn't in Modified with respect to pods:
> 
> · Dash pods with up to a 4 inch driver
> · Dash pods can be up to 4.5 inches in size (i.e. height, width) from factory surfaces (e.g. corner of dash). The depth of the pods can be from the face of the dash to the windshield.
> 
> So the crux is if you include a tweeter with a 4" driver in a pod, unless a tweeter is less than half an inch and you trim all the mounting flanges, no way it's going to be a 4.5" pod. So to have a pod with a 4" driver, what it seems to me is your only option is a 4" with an integrated point source and a pod less than .25" in thickness all around to achieve the 4.5" restriction. The 4" pillar rule just came out so that was not the point of our discussion, so I defer to others to seek/get the clarification .
> 
> - Richard


You're right.
Damn NASA scientists. 
I was thinking pillars at the time but the discussion reference to John's 4Runner was the correct context.
Sorry about that Richard.
None the less, it's still an appropriate question to the rule addendum that just recently appeared.
Is the 4" driver rule cumulative, or per driver per a-pillar?


Bret
PPI-ART COLLECTOR


----------



## asota

On 2-18 I saved the rules and that rule was in there wonder when they changed it


----------



## Justin Zazzi

This moving-target rulebook is frustrating.

Please do not change the rules mid-season like this any more, and also offer some clarity on cars that were in one class before, but have been bumped into new classes.

-J


----------



## papasin

asota said:


> On 2-18 I saved the rules and that rule was in there wonder when they changed it


The timestamp on the rules file I have with the changes is 2/15. So for those of us in CA who competed in Autorama, most if not all of us weren't aware of these clarifications and there may have been some inadvertant violations .


----------



## pocket5s

I just looked at my copy. Dated January 23. Only thing relating to pods or dash for Modex is:



> Dash pods above or in front of dash cut out up to 4.5 inches above factory surface


Looks like it was changed sometime after that. Looking at the most recent version on the site, it has the two provisions under the 'Not Permitted' section. However it looks like you can have a 4" and a tweeter. Nothing about total size of the pod, just can't protrude more than 3.5" total and not have a driver bigger than 4".


----------



## dietDrThunder

bikinpunk said:


> <snip>
> 
> Therefore, when I decided to go with the new drivers/pillar install a few weeks ago, I made sure to stay within the bounds of the new rules just so I wouldn't have to worry about anything. Already competed and got approved in Modex @ Freeze Fest a couple weeks ago. Now I'm in Extreme?
> 
> </snip>


Welcome to my world from last year.


----------



## chefhow

dietDrThunder said:


> Welcome to my world from last year.


Big difference between what happened to you and Erin.
You had no rules change on you, you had a ruling change, it's happened to lots of us even at finals before(me included). 
Erin built a car at a cost based on a NEW set of rules that were published by MECA and then changed by MECA. He interpreted them properly originally but the change in the written rules moved him out of his class.


----------



## dietDrThunder

chefhow said:


> Big difference between what happened to you and Erin.
> You had no rules change on you, you had a ruling change, it's happened to lots of us even at finals before(me included).
> Erin built a car at a cost based on a NEW set of rules that were published by MECA and then changed by MECA. He interpreted them properly originally but the change in the written rules moved him out of his class.


You are right for sure. I was looking at the bigger picture idea that MECA "rules" are not to be relied upon for consistency in content nor interpretation.

EDIT: I was warned about this and chose to ignore the warnings because I thought they were silly and couldn't possibly be true. Bad decision.


----------



## AccordUno

So can someone clarify the new changes, please?

APillars can not protrude more that 3" and total speaker diameter not to exceed 4"? If that what is states now?


----------



## pocket5s

AccordUno said:


> So can someone clarify the new changes, please?
> 
> APillars can not protrude more that 3" and total speaker diameter not to exceed 4"? If that what is states now?


Straight from the book in the 'not permitted' section of Modex:

• A-pillar mods protruding more than 3.5 inches from the factory surface 
• A-pillar mods with drivers larger than 4 inches


----------



## Matt R

A little sarcasm first guys, please dont take offense. 

Lets put an 8" fullrange driver hanging off the pillar since it doesnt have any limitations.

The rule was made with conserns that larger speakers on the pillar will protrude too far into the line of site to the road. It was a rule made with the safety of the vehicles in mind. 

With the dash rule being built up 4.5 inches and a pillar being built out 3.5 inches, there are several vehicles that wouldnt be able to see the road at all. They would have a little tunnel in the center of the vehicle they could see through. 

Personally, I wouldnt put anything larger than a 2" or 3" driver on a pillar just for the above reason. 

If you keep your speakers on the pillar you can absolutely have points for whatever class you end up in. You could also move the speakers to the top of the dash and keep your points and car in modex. You could also put a 4" in the same location.

Sorry for the issues but the safety of the vehicles that compete with MECA is important to us.

Matt


----------



## michaelsil1

Matt R said:


> Sorry for the issues but the safety of the vehicles that compete with MECA is important to us.
> 
> Matt


I've seen some beautiful install ideas put into effect and I would ask them can you see out of your windshield and the answer was no.


First and foremost its a Vehicle not a hazard to you and others.


----------



## ErinH

Well, what sucks about that is that not every car is created the same. 

In my car, a 5" mid protrudes no further than a 2-3" mid in many others' cars. My pillar has a window area that I was able to take advantage of. (side note: actually, Honda started using the area for tweeter installs in OEM a couple years after a bunch of us started modding our pillars to look this way.)

Matt, you actually judged my car and noted that I was within the allowed limit from the factory pillar at Freeze Fest. You and I chatted a bit about this and you thought they were fine. As I stated previously, this new rule not permitting >4" driver in the pillar wasn't in the rulebook then. My issue is that now it is... and even though I have a larger driver than 4" up there, it does not get in the line of sight. In fact, I redid the pillars in a manner that used less of the pillar and took advantage of the space behind it so the drivers actually stick out less far than the 4" mids before them. And I redid my pillars based on the rules as written and published on the MECA site as of Jan 23 (or 28th, can't recall). The new rule bumped me. 










I think how the rule was written for modex before was fine: if the pods stick out further than x inches from the pillar or above the dash, then you are in extreme. That's clear and cut. But saying one can't use a driver of a given size even if they fall under the previous limitations simply because other cars are built in the manner that allows them to do the same isn't very cool. If I used a 4" driver in the same location, they would literally stick out no further than 0.5" from the pillar. That's how much depth I have in the defroster window area.

Cliffs: The rules were good last month. They limited a class based on vision impairment based on specific distance criterion. I fell within that rule. Cool. 

The rule has been altered to limit a class based on size of speaker used as it is assumed that a speaker larger than 4" would be a hindrance to vision. However, since not all cars are the same, some are more advantageous to X install. I don't think it's fair that a person not be allowed to take advantage of their car if the car permits them not breaking the spirit of the rule which apparently is vision impairment. That's what I did. And now the rules have changed in a month's time. That's my gripe.

My $.02.


----------



## Mic10is

New Modex Rules revision 6.5.2 prohibiting larger than a 4" driver in the pillar will also now be known as the Erin Hardinson Provision
Or the Erin rule.


----------



## ErinH

no joke.

it was the Steve Cook rule. But now I've adopted it.


----------



## MacLeod

It's hard to disagree with ya Erin. Looking at the picture, it looks like you lost only a couple inches of visibility with the way your pods are constructed. 

I see MECA's point but the rules should clarify that the pods have to be actually blocking the windshield. Matt's absolutely right that somebody would try to stick 8's on their pillars eventually and you have to have limits but since your pods barely block any windshield at all, I don't see how this is a concern. It shouldn't be an arbitrary, blanket ban on a certain size of a driver but instead make it no more than X inches of the windshield can be blocked. I think that would be a better way.


----------



## Mic10is

I had suggested that they do what EMMA does and have a piece of paper "X' inches long that is put on the outside of the windshield at the windows edge. If, from the driver seat looking forward if the piece of paper is not visible, then you would be moved to the higher class. but if you can see the edge of the paper then you would be fine.


----------



## tnaudio

I like the rule as it allows many different cars to compete in the class. If not limiting the size of driver you would wind up with everyone in the class with the same car.


----------



## ErinH

I'm being 100% honest when I say the pods in my car are in no way in the line of sight. Ill provide drivers seat pictures later .


----------



## pocket5s

Mic10is said:


> I had suggested that they do what EMMA does and have a piece of paper "X' inches long that is put on the outside of the windshield at the windows edge. If, from the driver seat looking forward if the piece of paper is not visible, then you would be moved to the higher class. but if you can see the edge of the paper then you would be fine.


Is that based on driving position or judging position? The further back you go the less chance of seeing the whole piece of paper.


----------



## pocket5s

tnaudio said:


> I like the rule as it allows many different cars to compete in the class. If not limiting the size of driver you would wind up with everyone in the class with the same car.


That seems logical, yet every class would be predisposed to certain kinds of cars, especially those requiring stock locations, yet there is a lot of variety as it is.


----------



## Matt R

Your car was not discussed at all in the making of the rules. As I tried to explain to you in our last PM that rule was supposed to be in the book when it was released. With the editing and reformatting of the rule book it got left out. This was in no way intended to push you or anyone in particular into a higher class. 

I dont recall seeing that front stage before, maybe I did and didnt know it was a 5 inch driver. I can't remember. I believe you are also using the window area and covering up the whole thing? If you are covering up the whole forward window, i'm not sure thats within the intent of the Modex rules.

Again, sorry you are upset about this. It was a mistake and the revision was meant to be in the book when it was released the first time.

Matt


----------



## ErinH

Matt R said:


> Your car was not discussed at all in the making of the rules.


I didn't intend to imply it was. I'm not that self centered. 

Fair points all around. At this point I've already accepted it. As long as my points carry forward I'm good. But I'll burn that bridge when I get there.


----------



## Darth SQ

Matt R said:


> Your car was not discussed at all in the making of the rules. As I tried to explain to you in our last PM that rule was supposed to be in the book when it was released. With the editing and reformatting of the rule book it got left out. This was in no way intended to push you or anyone in particular into a higher class.
> 
> I dont recall seeing that front stage before, maybe I did and didnt know it was a 5 inch driver. I can't remember. I believe you are also using the window area and covering up the whole thing? If you are covering up the whole forward window, i'm not sure thats within the intent of the Modex rules.
> 
> Again, sorry you are upset about this. It was a mistake and the revision was meant to be in the book when it was released the first time.
> 
> Matt


Matt,
If you've ever sat in an Accord or Fit with that joke of a triangle window in both corners in front of the doors you'd quickly realize that they are absolutely useless.
From the driver's seat you can't even see the glass panel on the driver's side, and the passenger side window is only there to trick the eye into believing there's no blind spot. 
Owning one myself, I can attest that Erin's field of vision has in no way been compromised.
It's actually a brilliant solution to a-pillar speaker placement and I would go as far as to say it's less obstructive to the windshield and safer than anyone installing 4" drivers in a traditional a-pillar.

Just my .02s worth.


Bret
PPI-ART COLLECTOR


----------



## Neil_J

On the subject of safety, can you remove the driver/passenger airbag(s) and stay in ModEx?


----------



## Genxx

My understanding has always been, yes you can remove them. 

With the dash rule being built up 4.5 inches and a pillar being built out 3.5 inches--If you can work a 8" driver to conform to that, then I see no reason you could not do a pod with it.

Limiting driver size in MODEX needs to be removed and if the 4.5 x 3.5 measurements are deemed not enough limitations to stop someone from doing something crazy then do something like Mic suggested. Limiting driver size in class this far up the food chain of classes needs to be re-evaluated. 

My truck still conforms to the new rules for MODEX so this is not based on my own benefit but common sense, rational thinking. 

R&E needs to re-look this ruling. 

Matt-I guess what everyone should know is how many people need to start officially bugging the **** out MECA R&E until the rule is re-looked.


----------



## Wesayso

bikinpunk said:


>


Looking at this picture one could debate if the speaker is a-pillar mounted. On about every other car this would be called the sail panel area. Actually it is somewhere inbetween those locations. I can't see it hindering the view though. You can actually see the entire a pillar. I've been in cars with a window in that spot and it is useless as a window and more a gimmic. The new generation civic (as an example I witnessed) has a tweeter in that spot (as mentioned by Erin the newer cars used that spot):









Not that different in placement from a (well known) sail panel build:


----------



## decibelle

Genxx said:


> My truck still conforms to the new rules for MODEX so this is not based on my own benefit but common sense, rational thinking.
> 
> R&E needs to re-look this ruling.
> 
> Matt-I guess what everyone should know is how many people need to start officially bugging the **** out MECA R&E until the rule is re-looked.


Couldn't agree more. 

Common sense and rational thinking have eluded the rules and been replaced by overtechnical nitpicking that has driven folks away from MECA. I don't advocate MODEX allowing 8" drivers in your pillars if you find a way to make that work, but not every car adheres to the rules by the letter and when that happens we can't just throw them under the bus without further consideration. Reasonable exceptions need to be made on a case-by-case basis. 

I too have sat in cars like Erin's with the triangle windows and agree that they're entirely useless. The "sail panel" area in front of it blocks any useful line of sight and defeats the point of the window. So while technically a window is being blocked, it wasn't serving its only purpose and it would be silly to have to move up a class because of that.


----------



## Neil_J

millerlyte said:


> *Common sense and rational thinking have eluded the rules and been replaced by overtechnical nitpicking that has driven folks away from MECA. *I don't advocate MODEX allowing 8" drivers in your pillars if you find a way to make that work, but not every car adheres to the rules by the letter and when that happens we can't just throw them under the bus without further consideration. Reasonable exceptions need to be made on a case-by-case basis.


+1 Ally, couldn't agree more.


----------



## MacLeod

It does seem they're getting a little too over picky with the rules these days. If it keeps going, everybody will be in Extreme! I mean 4" mids on the A pillars is Modified but a 5" is Extreme? :screwy:

Several years ago they opened up the rules in each class to debate by members on the MECA'S forums. Wish they'd do this again.


----------



## pocket5s

I agree with her as well. There is a bit of a line between being too detailed and not detailed enough. Take a look at IASCA's rules for example. They are pretty wide open compared to meca's. I don't particularly agree with their classing and there is a lot more room for "can I do..." and "what if..." in there. 

IMO the downside of being too definitive is you end up excluding things that weren't really part of the _intent_. Erin's pillars are a perfect example. The intent seemed to be "don't obstruct the driver's view of the road". He did that, yet it still fails. 

Another is the Modex change for venting speakers using no more than dual 4" vents. This seems (could be wrong) to be geared towards large midbass speakers in the kicks. However, by definition it also means that you could not have a true IB sub in the car. If someone wanted to do an IB sub in a hatchback, like say Todd did with his GTi, they get bumped all the way to extreme for that.


----------



## MacLeod

I think they just need to stop focusing on things that don't matter. Take the 1/2" metal cutting rule in Street. I had to cut 1" of metal to get my 6.5's in the doors of my Accord so I'm Mod Street. My 07 Accord, I got them in there only shaving 1/2" off. Same location, same size speaker but 2 different classes. It's a needless hitch because it makes no difference. 

The classes need to offer a nice flow of progression throughout the classes and for the most part they do but things like that 1/2" metal rule or this brand new A pillar thing or even the flush mounting tweeters last year take from that. The rules need to also allow for and encourage creativity. If you get over technical and over picky, you'll legislate the creativity right out of all the classes but Extreme and Master not to mention legislating out a bunch of competitors too. This is a very expensive hobby and if you make it top much of a hassle, some may just think it's more trouble than its worth to drop $500 on a finals weekend.


----------



## pocket5s

and as it now there is no progression from extreme to master. the only difference is one is a requirement if you are in the 12v industry.


----------



## Neil_J

If the rule is really there for safety (i.e. visibility) then the rule should be stated in terms of what you can or cannot see from the driver's seat, like EMMA does it. Not how big the pod's (or speaker's) size is. IMHO.


----------



## d3adl1fter

Guys/girls 
Compared to the rules as written in the past this is by far the biggest step in the right direction, will there ALWAYS be room for improvement...sure (especially to the super cynical ones among us)...we can Monday morning quarterback this to infinity and beyond but in the end you can't please everyone...the time they (R and E committee) spent improving what was so vaguely written before deserves kudos and I applaud them for that..

I have no doubt things will continually try to be improved upon...

Josh


----------



## AccordUno

Let's be honest, the rule is really to prevent installs like Vinny's Dodge Ram (if you haven't seen it take a look, way past the 3" the pillars) and Steve Cook's Avalanche from competing in lower classes..


----------



## beef316

When we talk about safety shouldn't we also talk about the fact that we are putting speakers in places that air bags deploy? On the dash or on the a~pillar there is a good chance that the pods and/or speakers are going to be projectiles. That to me is a bigger concern. Am I missing something?

Sent from my SCH-I510 using Tapatalk 2


----------



## thehatedguy

I'd like to see Vinny's install...heard about it.

You are right on too Beef...


----------



## tnaudio

This really isn't even hard. Don't mount anything above 4" in the a pillar. Seems pretty easy to follow.


----------



## pionkej

tnaudio said:


> This really isn't even hard. Don't mount anything above 4" in the a pillar. Seems pretty easy to follow.


No **** dude. Only problem is this change came AFTER the primary changes people were waiting on. Meaning that some people who waited to update their build until the rule changes were published (and didn't expect this second change) could have (and some have) gotten screwed.


----------



## Neil_J

Changing rules mid-season IS hard to follow. If it was a mistake that didn't make it in the first time, then so be it, leave it out until next season. Everyone should be able to print and read the rules once and build their system. How many other sports (racing etc) do that? Out of them, how many times have people bitched about how unfair it was?

Edit: Pionkej beat me to it


----------



## thehatedguy

But can you really mount a 4 on the pillar on axis given that the pod can't be more than 3.5" off of the factory surface? This is in Modex...mod street is differently worded.


----------



## Mic10is

thehatedguy said:


> I'd like to see Vinny's install...heard about it.
> 
> You are right on too Beef...


----------



## thehatedguy

It's nice to see what people are using as their reference point.


----------



## d3adl1fter

pionkej said:


> No **** dude. Only problem is this change came AFTER the primary changes people were waiting on. Meaning that some people who waited to update their build until the rule changes were published (and didn't expect this second change) could have (and some have) gotten screwed.


If you read Matt's response it wasn't changed it was to have been included in the original release....did someone drop the ball there, yep...it happens...was it intended to "screw people" I think not...the very first release of rules was completely wrong and everyone went nuts...this is still very early in the season to adapt and overcome or just compete in a different class...

Last season I was bumped in Spl to a walled class because of interpretatation in the rules that I interpreted differently, oh well I got my ass handed to me with my sq sealed box and it nearly cost me making the points to get to finals...I for one am glad to see more definition in the rules...


----------



## pionkej

d3adl1fter said:


> If you read Matt's response it wasn't changed it was to have been included in the original release....did someone drop the ball there, yep...it happens...was it intended to "screw people" I think not...the very first release of rules was completely wrong and everyone went nuts...this is still very early in the season to adapt and overcome or just compete in a different class...
> 
> Last season I was bumped in Spl to a walled class because of interpretatation in the rules that I interpreted differently, oh well I got my ass handed to me with my sq sealed box and it nearly cost me making the points to get to finals...I for one am glad to see more definition in the rules...


I'm not sure what the deal is, but I didn't say anything about "intent." 

Here is how I see it. MECA website talked about a rule change for M-O-N-T-H-S and people waited. Change is released and people freak! We're told that was incorrect and "corrected" rules are put into place. 

There was no, "some updates are still due" or a heads up here, via email to members, or even on the MECA site. They just showed up, unannounced, well into the season (after a "major" show in the SE and the just before the most major show outside Finals). 

So while I have no dog in this fight, I certainly understand the complaint and I definitely don't think it's as simple as "don't run 4" speakers".


----------



## DAT

Hmm, While I waited to rebuild because of the rules changes, I still feel that it should be a rule that if you own a shop or work for a car audio manufacturer you should only be allowed to do Extreme, or Master...


----------



## Matt R

This was not a "mid season change" we released the rules a week or so before freeze fest. The revision came a week or so after that. For those of yall that dont know Freez fest is a Judges training weekend and somewhat of a practice run for new judges. Spring Break Nationals has always been know as the big kick off show for the season. 

We made a mistake and left this out. Sorry to anyone that this affected!

On another note, the rule did state that the build out could not excede 3.5 inches from the factory surface. I bet if you measured from where the bottom of the pillar WAS from the factory, to where it is now (covering the whole window), it would exceed the 3.5 inch rule. 

If the R&E committe made acceptions for one car they would have to make them for everyone. The rules were intended to be a certain way and articulating that is the difficult part. We are only human and make mistakes like everyone else. I personally think the ruels are better than ever. We will keep trying to make them as good as we can based on what we think will keep the classes competitive.

For those that dont remember, just a few years ago Modex (Custom) was an anything goes class. That meant we had 3 classes with little to no seperation. Now we have a class above modified that is a bit more of a gradual step before you get to full dash rebuilds.


----------



## decibelle

Matt R said:


> If the R&E committe made acceptions for one car they would have to make them for everyone.


This I don't understand the logic behind. All cars are built differently, what is ok for one person may have a totally different effect for another just by the design of their car. A rare few should have exceptions. That rule I think is what kills some of the creativity.


----------



## thehatedguy

I see what you mean, but didn't know if the factory surface would be the factory trim or the actual pillar post.


----------



## beef316

millerlyte said:


> This I don't understand the logic behind. All cars are built differently, what is ok for one person may have a totally different effect for another just by the design of their car. A rare few should have exceptions. That rule I think is what kills some of the creativity.


If tge rule is not clearly defined like it is then there would be arguments at every show. It has to be cut and dry.
Sent from my SCH-I510 using Tapatalk 2


----------



## decibelle

I am not advocating total leniency and treating everyone as a special case, but you can't deny that Erin's install falls between the lines. That useless 1/4th of a window is all that makes him extreme or modex? Sorry, that's pushing it imho. 

My .02.


----------



## Matt R

millerlyte said:


> This I don't understand the logic behind. All cars are built differently, what is ok for one person may have a totally different effect for another just by the design of their car. A rare few should have exceptions. That rule I think is what kills some of the creativity.


So this is jusy my personal opinion.

If you cant get great sound from a speaker 4 inches or SMALLER on the a-pillar, The dash is very open for much larger speakers. The dash and pillar options, together or seperate are way open for CREATIVITY. Saying otherwise is totally wrong. It seems like several people are looking at a very small part of the rules for Modex. 

Again just my opinion.


----------



## thehatedguy

I was bummed I wouldn't be in modified if I put a 10 in the dash where I had my center channel at...though I didn't cut anything, just removed a tray.

Or would it since nothing was physically cut?


----------



## papasin

millerlyte said:


> I am not advocating total leniency and treating everyone as a special case, but you can't deny that Erin's install falls between the lines. That useless 1/4th of a window is all that makes him extreme or modex? Sorry, that's pushing it imho.
> 
> My .02.


I have a small dog in this fight having those identical windows as Erin and utilizing the same windows but in the Modified class. I have the AP Nz3-A/AT in there which is a 3", so hopefully, that doesn't all of a sudden put me into Extreme just because I utilized those windows! 




























EDIT: re-reading the Modified rules, I *should* be ok but would hate to be disqualified at state finals or in the off chance I have the desire to go to Worlds should I be lucky enough to survive the highly stacked Modified class in CA.

Same rules apply for Modified...

Not permitted:
· A-pillar mods protruding more than 3.5 inches from the factory surface
· A-pillar mods with drivers larger than 4 inches

I definitely am ok with the 2nd, but as for "the factory surface", if you look at the install, measuring from the base of the pillar, it's significantly less than 3.5" so hoping there isn't any "window rule" that comes into play...


----------



## Matt R

thehatedguy said:


> I was bummed I wouldn't be in modex if I put a 10 in the dash where I had my center channel at...though I didn't cut anything, just removed a tray.
> 
> Or would it since nothing was physically cut?


This is a major opporunity for creativity. Subs can be placed anywhere in the vehicle from modified class up. As long as the other rules of the class are followed.

Modex allows you to cut 2 holes up to 60 sq inches each, if you did have to cut. If you dont cut the dash to get the speaker below it, you can put it on the dash as long as the other rules are followed (4.5" off factory surface).


----------



## thehatedguy

I'll send you a picture one day.


----------



## Matt R

papasin said:


> I have a small dog in this fight having those identical windows as Erin and utilizing the same windows but in the Modified class. I have the AP Nz3-A/AT in there which is a 3", so hopefully, that doesn't all of a sudden put me into Extreme just because I utilized those windows!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EDIT: re-reading the Modified rules, I *should* be ok but would hate to be disqualified at state finals or in the off chance I have the desire to go to Worlds should I be lucky enough to survive the highly stacked Modified class in CA.
> 
> Same rules apply for Modified...
> 
> Not permitted:
> · A-pillar mods protruding more than 3.5 inches from the factory surface
> · A-pillar mods with drivers larger than 4 inches
> 
> I definitely am ok with the 2nd, but as for "the factory surface", if you look at the install, measuring from the base of the pillar, it's significantly less than 3.5" so hoping there isn't any "window rule" that comes into play...[/QUO
> 
> This is a situation we havent addressed, it is specific to just a few vehicles. I would say if your within the 3.5" rule, you should be ok in either class.


----------



## papasin

Matt R said:


> This is a situation we havent addressed, it is specific to just a few vehicles. I would say if your within the 3.5" rule, you should be ok in either class.


Thanks for the clarification Matt. Yes, I am within the 3.5" rule. Not sure where to start measuring but I am ok whether the weatherstripping is included or not. When measuring from the start of the weatherstripping, my pillar protrudes less than 2". If you include the weatherstripping, it's still under 3".










Whew. I'd hate for my first official year in MECA to be in Extreme!


----------



## KP

The rules reads 3.5" from THE panel. Perhaps it should read ALL OEM panels the enclosure is attached to? The picture above shows 1.75" from one panel but it will be over 3.5" from the top of the pillar to the bottom of the enclosure.

Sounds like the rule is in place to limit the size of the speaker you can get ON AXIS per class. If you took the above enclosure or Erin's and moved them on top of the dash=Extreme. 

It is unfortunate some wording was omitted in the first release or sure.


----------



## thehatedguy

That's why I was asking was it from the pillar post or from the pillar trim. It would a pretty large difference.


----------



## papasin

AcuraTLSQ said:


> The rules reads 3.5" from THE panel. Perhaps it should read ALL OEM panels the enclosure is attached to? The picture above shows 1.75" from one panel but it will be over 3.5" from the top of the pillar to the bottom of the enclosure.
> 
> Sounds like the rule is in place to limit the size of the speaker you can get ON AXIS per class. If you took the above enclosure or Erin's and moved them on top of the dash=Extreme.
> 
> It is unfortunate some wording was omitted in the first release or sure.


Nope. Still 3.5" on mine. I took out my driver, and measured from within. See pic below.










Also, the rules read:
·A-pillar mods protruding more than 3.5 inches from the factory surface (doesn't say anything about a panel)

So is the "factory surface" the start of my dash? If that's the case, definitely less than 3.5" not counting the window section. Even if you count the window area, I'm still at 3.5". No matter where I put the tape measure, it is less than 3.5".

Another question too...is this considered a "pod" or a "pillar"...just because it's integrated into the pillar, why does it not qualify as a pod?

For "pods", there's a little more space "allowed" at 4.5" per the rulebook.

Dash pods with up to a 4 inch driver
· Dash pods can be up to 4.5 inches in size (i.e. height, width)
from factory surfaces (e.g. corner of dash).
Depth of pods can be from face of dash to windshield.

So the "depth" of my pod is less than 4.5" and is right around 3". The pillar is not sticking out beyond 3.5" from the start of my dash, and literally 3.5" even if you're counting my window as the part of my dash.

No idea how this would put the car into extreme with a 3" driver that is integrated into the vehicle pillar as a pod and obstructs A LOT LESS vs. putting a 4.5" pod on the dash (and looks as oem as it can get as mentioned already).

EDIT: And as for comparing with Erin's pillars, I thought the trigger for his bump up wasn't the protrusion, but because the size of the driver used.


----------



## Matt R

The factory surface reffers to the trim panel (Pillar or dash plastic). 

The difference between a pod and a molded pillar or panel is the molded in part. A pod simply sits on top of a surface. 

Try measuring from the bottom of the factory apillar (bottom rear) to the rear of the car or the window trim where you new panel ends. That is the area that looks like it may be deeper than 3.5 inches.


----------



## ErinH

Like this?










Or did you mean from the very back of the pillar? Just asking for clarification here. If its from the back then Papasin is bumped up. If not then we both fit this rule. 

This was taken when the pillars were made to be sure I fell within the 3.5" rule. My understanding of the rule seems to be correct as far as that goes.


----------



## strakele

I would say that the 3.5" rule means that it sticks out 3.5" further from wherever the edge of the panel used to be. Like if you put a speaker that is 2" deep into a pillar and 1.5" of that is 'inside' the pillar, then the pillar only has to be built out from the original surface by .5" and it falls well within the rule.

Though it is fairly uncommon for a car to be able to fit speakers larger than 4" on the dash/pillar without major obstructions, I certainly wouldn't call the modifications done to Erin's pillars "extreme."


----------



## highly

strakele said:


> I would say that the 3.5" rule means that it sticks out 3.5" further from wherever the edge of the panel used to be. Like if you put a speaker that is 2" deep into a pillar and 1.5" of that is 'inside' the pillar, then the pillar only has to be built out from the original surface by .5" and it falls well within the rule.
> 
> Though it is fairly uncommon for a car to be able to fit speakers larger than 4" on the dash/pillar without major obstructions, I certainly wouldn't call the modifications done to Erin's pillars "extreme."


Agreed (in principle, as I have no say of course), but I especially agree when the next step from a 4" midrange is to 'anything goes'. That is less of a step than it is a flying leap. Define Extreme as a logical next step. Put anything goes up in Masters. Then the entire breadth of classes remains a logical steppingstone to the next. All the way to Masters. Extreme as it is now is so close as to be a duplicate class to Masters anyway. 

Either way...let's play! 

-T


----------



## ErinH

I just sent an email to Steve asking if my points can be transferred to my new class in Extreme. Hopefully it's not an issue. I don't want to draw this garbage out anymore. I compete for fun. My car isn't going to change to bump myself back down and it seems the decision has been made, no matter how unfair it seems given it was provided after the fact. Life isn't fair; I learned that from my Street Law teacher in HS. 


I do think that these kind of things should really be avoided entirely in the future and for the sake of everyone competing, rules should be spelled out in full in the rule book should competitors fail to seek further information themselves. No one is perfect. The judges are learning as they go so chalk it up to a human error element. No big deal. In a way, it's kind of cool I get to compete with the three guys in MECA I really respect and enjoy calling friends the most. So, game on, fellas! 

- Erin


----------



## Darth SQ

cajunner said:


> just seems like an after the fact move to place >4" drivers out of class, after points have been awarded for accepting >4" drivers.
> 
> what is so special about 4" drivers, that a 4.5" driver is somehow unfairly advantaged?
> 
> or 5"?
> 
> I guess, if you measure displacement vis a vee, you could make the case that a long-stroker 3" is inconveniencing competitors with a 4" cone and tiny Xmax?
> 
> how many people are considering putting 5" drivers into their A-pillar/sail locale, anyways?
> 
> *I think the chutzpah involved overrides the meaningless circumferential area defense, as it would be quite bully to see the bikinpunk stretch, and hear it, than make it an outlier, and an outlaw based on less objective reasoning*.


OMG, I think I can finally speak cajunner. 
I believe I actually understood that. epper:

Erin,
Well done taking the high road on all this.
My biggest concern was that you were going to change the a-pillars back to conform which would be such a mistake since the outcome you've achieved is so beautiful in form and function.



Bret
PPI-ART COLLECTOR


----------



## MacLeod

I think I get what they're going for, you gotta draw the line somewhere. If you don't, eventually you'll have guys bolting down a set of home audio bookshelf speakers to their dash. 5" drivers is where the required enclosure generally starts to get bigger and maybe that's why they drew the line there. Also 5's can generally play a lot lower than the typical 4. Most 5's will hit 50 Hz easily while most 4's won't come close since they're typically more of a midrange specific driver so the guy using a set of 5's on his dash wouldn't necessarily need anything else besides a sub and that would give a sizeable advantage over the guy running 4's and midbass drivers in his doors or kicks. So there is a pretty decent jump in advantages between 4" to 5" drivers where there isn't much between 5 to 6 or 3 to 4.

I think we all, MECA included, agree that changing that rule after they'd already been published was a mistake but I do see their reasoning behind the 4" limit and do now see the need to draw the line somewhere.


----------



## KP

papasin said:


> Thanks for the clarification Matt. Yes, I am within the 3.5" rule. Not sure where to start measuring but I am ok whether the weatherstripping is included or not. When measuring from the start of the weatherstripping, my pillar protrudes less than 2". If you include the weatherstripping, it's still under 3".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Whew. I'd hate for my first official year in MECA to be in Extreme!


To clarify, I do not care who is what class. I'm just trying to figure this out because I know before the year is out I will have to do verification. Granted the picture is not good and I am not there to measure BUT by eyeballing the 3" driver above, it is Extreme in my eyes. Why? If you measure from the pillar below the windshield DOWN it is more than 3.5". If your pod was moved UP(towards the wind shield) into the pillar and not attached to the bottom of it, your good for Modex. Just my .02.

Rule says protrudes from not protrude INTO.


----------



## ErinH

Talked to Steve and told him per the new version of the rulebook I am in Extreme and he adjusted my standing. He applied my scores to Extreme which put me in 2nd place. So, I have 12 points toward finals (not 15 like I did have, but whatever). What sucks is the other guys who were in Extreme got knocked down a place. 


As a side note, Steve said Vinny wanted to talk to me about why I was bumped so I gave him a call last night but wasn't able to talk with him. I assume he's just trying to get clarification since he's not part of this discussion forum. I did send him an email with the link to this thread, though. If anything fruitful comes of it, I'll let you guys know. Like Kirk, I think everyone needs to be on the same page. I'm just glad this was brought up/caught now rather than later in the season. And I know that no one really wants to show up to Finals and find out they've been bumped.


----------



## Matt R

MacLeod said:


> I think I get what they're going for, you gotta draw the line somewhere. If you don't, eventually you'll have guys bolting down a set of home audio bookshelf speakers to their dash. 5" drivers is where the required enclosure generally starts to get bigger and maybe that's why they drew the line there. Also 5's can generally play a lot lower than the typical 4. Most 5's will hit 50 Hz easily while most 4's won't come close since they're typically more of a midrange specific driver so the guy using a set of 5's on his dash wouldn't necessarily need anything else besides a sub and that would give a sizeable advantage over the guy running 4's and midbass drivers in his doors or kicks. So there is a pretty decent jump in advantages between 4" to 5" drivers where there isn't much between 5 to 6 or 3 to 4.
> 
> I think we all, MECA included, agree that changing that rule after they'd already been published was a mistake but I do see their reasoning behind the 4" limit and do now see the need to draw the line somewhere.


Yeah, the other Aaron gets it!!!!!


----------



## Matt R

AcuraTLSQ said:


> To clarify, I do not care who is what class. I'm just trying to figure this out because I know before the year is out I will have to do verification. Granted the picture is not good and I am not there to measure BUT by eyeballing the 3" driver above, it is Extreme in my eyes. Why? If you measure from the pillar below the windshield DOWN it is more than 3.5". If your pod was moved UP(towards the wind shield) into the pillar and not attached to the bottom of it, your good for Modex. Just my .02.
> 
> Rule says protrudes from not protrude INTO.


Really, I would like to see what the factory pillar looks like to determine what was done to it.


----------



## strakele

3.5 inches is a good bit deeper than most normal 3-4" drivers. Most pillar installs are done by mounting the speaker mostly inside the pillar so that not much sticks out of the factory surface, like the above pictures. There is no way anything on that pillar sticks out more than 3.5" from where it used to.

You could take a 4" driver that is 3" deep and glue it magnet side down to the factory a-pillar and it would fall within the rules - and that would stick out WAY more than most peoples pillar builds. The 3.5" rule just prevents mounting 4" drivers on axis in the pillars..and even then I bet with some creative trimming you could get it within the rules in some cars.

This is getting kinda ridiculous. Putting a 3" midrange into an a-pillar is not an "extreme" modification.

Some cars are inherently more advantageous for certain kinds of installs than others. Some cars come stock with large midbasses in the doors, midranges in the dash corners, and tweets in the sails or pillar and can compete in stock. Some other cars would be put in modex at minimum for installing those same speakers in the same way. Some cars can apparently fit 5" speakers in the pillars without having them stick out at all. It is what it is.


----------



## MacLeod

That is true but I think MECA is trying to keep it system vs system and not car vs car. I don't think they want it like SPL was a few years back when you either competed with a CRX or you lost. That was the whole reason behind them changing the mic location to the head rest, it took the car out of the equation. 

I think MECA is trying to do the same here as much as they can at least. Otherwise everybody would have to run Civics since they're about the only car you can put 5's in and stay under the 3.5" rule. There is no way you can make it totally equal but by limjting driver size in addition to how big the pod is, you keep it based more on the system itself and not as much on the advantages of a particular model of car.


----------



## thehatedguy

What 5s can play 50 hertz with any balls?


----------



## strakele

MacLeod said:


> That is true but I think MECA is trying to keep it system vs system and not car vs car. I don't think they want it like SPL was a few years back when you either competed with a CRX or you lost. That was the whole reason behind them changing the mic location to the head rest, it took the car out of the equation.
> 
> I think MECA is trying to do the same here as much as they can at least. Otherwise everybody would have to run Civics since they're about the only car you can put 5's in and stay under the 3.5" rule. There is no way you can make it totally equal but by limjting driver size in addition to how big the pod is, you keep it based more on the system itself and not as much on the advantages of a particular model of car.


Corvettes, Infinities, and others come with 10's in the doors. They gonna move them to a higher class cause you happen to be able to fit large drivers up front without cutting metal or modding door panels whereas most cars can only fit 6.5's?


----------



## ErinH

thehatedguy said:


> What 5s can play 50 hertz with any balls?


lol. My mids have an Fs of 178hz. There are literally 3" drivers with lower Fs and more excursion than mine.


----------



## ErinH

strakele said:


> Corvettes, Infinities, and others come with 10's in the doors. They gonna move them to a higher class cause you happen to be able to fit large drivers up front without cutting metal or modding door panels whereas most cars can only fit 6.5's?


true that.


----------



## d3adl1fter

strakele said:


> Corvettes, Infinities, and others come with 10's in the doors. They gonna move them to a higher class cause you happen to be able to fit large drivers up front without cutting metal or modding door panels whereas most cars can only fit 6.5's?


Not sure I saw a rule stating size driver restriction in a door...also you mention that's how they come..so if you have a corvette and roll with 10's in stock class so be it..not sure the correlation here


----------



## bigbubba

Now I'm wondering if I'm still in Modified or in Extreme. If I get moved I may just quit the whole damn competition thing. I know they say to be in it for the fun of it but if from show to show you don't know what class you are going to be in, and you haven't changed anything, how much fun are you gonna have?


----------



## strakele

d3adl1fter said:


> Not sure I saw a rule stating size driver restriction in a door...also you mention that's how they come..so if you have a corvette and roll with 10's in stock class so be it..not sure the correlation here


The point was they they seem to be trying to limit driver size based on some theoretical advantage larger drivers give. Some cars can fit bigger speakers than others in certain locations.

- A Civic can fit 5.25" speakers in the pillars and otherwise conform to rules for modified.
- My Lancer cannot - I'd have to go extreme to fit that. I bet some trucks/SUV's with huge pillars could fit 5's without looking out of place.
- A Maxima can fit 3 or 4" speakers in the dash corners and be in stock class.
- I'd have to cut my dash and go into modex to do that.
- A Vette can fit 10" speakers in the door and be in stock.
- I'd have to cut tons of metal and rebuild my door and be in modex or extreme to do that.

I know there isn't a rule in the books about door speaker/midbass size. But if they're trying to use some theoretical advantage of larger drivers to break up classes - i.e. 4" speaker in pillar = modified whereas 5" speaker in pillar = extreme, then why wouldn't they do the same for midbass? It's quite a huge 'advantage" to be able to fit a pair of 10's up front when most people are running 6.5's.


----------



## ErinH

I guess what bothers me about limiting to a certain size is the simple fact that you're docking the car. Consider "back in the day" when people chose cars specifically for install potential. That was part of the competition aspect.... the aspect where you did all you could do within the rules given to you. 


*Again, I WANT IT TO BE KNOWN that I'm not whining or wanting to be in MODEX. I'm in Extreme. That's it. So, now that the 'drama' is over with I'll speak from a regular ol' competitors' perspective. To anyone who thinks I'm trying to get back in to Modex, you're wrong. Just want to state that right now. *


With that said, I find it kind of funny how Modex used to be the class you went if you didn't want to cut your dash up. Not that it didn't permit it; it certainly did. But, in my mind it seemed Extreme was the class where you went if the dash was going to get cut. I know a couple guys who believed this so strongly they put themselves in to Extreme, even though they conformed to Modex rules. Now Extreme is the class with pillar pods and Modex is the class with dashes cut to allow 4" drivers. I'm not complaining... I just wonder if anyone else has found the irony in that.


----------



## thehatedguy

I would think you could use whatever sized speakers that came in the car in Stock. Not that a Corvette really has anything else going for it...but the other cars that have large drivers in front might. But if the car had a sub in front from the factory, you can use it...unless I read the rules wrong. So I don't see why if you had 8s or 10s stock why you would be required to step down to a 6.5.


----------



## strakele

thehatedguy said:


> I would think you could use whatever sized speakers that came in the car in Stock. Not that a Corvette really has anything else going for it...but the other cars that have large drivers in front might. But if the car had a sub in front from the factory, you can use it...unless I read the rules wrong. So I don't see why if you had 8s or 10s stock why you would be required to step down to a 6.5.


That's exactly the point - you wouldn't.


----------



## stereo_luver

bigbubba said:


> Now I'm wondering if I'm still in Modified or in Extreme. If I get moved I may just quit the whole damn competition thing. I know they say to be in it for the fun of it but if from show to show you don't know what class you are going to be in, and you haven't changed anything, how much fun are you gonna have?


I look a it like this. I'm going to build my truck to the best I can given what I have in installation skills and tuning ability. I'll let the judges classify me and that is where I'll be.

Chuck


----------



## ErinH

I know what you guys (both sides) are saying. I think Grayson's coming at it from somewhat of the same angle I am where when you start limiting a class based on size speaker used, where does it end? If the rules state no larger than X" from/above/etc from Y surface, what do you do about the cars that came OEM like this? They have the supposed advantage because of this. Then others feel shafted. Then you get in to the gray area where I and Papasin fall where you have a large area that is unused by the factory so do you get to take advantage of that or not (seems the answer is obviously not). 

I actually feel for the judges and those who write the rulebook when it comes to this kind of stuff. There's a lot of area left to subjective thought and room for error, depending on how a judge's subjectivity points. But on the flip side, making hard and fast rules seems it can also cause headaches. With the 3.5" rule there are now at least 3 people in this thread (I'm not counting myself because I'm in extreme) who are subject to being bumped to Extreme at any given time.

I think for the cases where the user is really unsure, he should be able to send an email to MECA and have the judge's deliberate within themselves and provide written permission for X class. That way when Finals rolls around - and you have a "rogue" judge who says you've been bumped - you have a piece of paper that shows you have been given permission to compete in that class. No questions... everyone goes on about their way. I imagine this has happened, but I am bringing it up because I know 2 guys last year who quit competing because they were told one thing by one judge, then something by another which totally threw them for a loop. And being newcomers, they were turned off from competing (I haven't' seen them again this year). Obviously the last thing we want is this kind of impression on new people. Those who have been around a bit understand there are ebbs and flows to it all and just deal with what comes at them (within reason).


----------



## Neil_J

strakele said:


> The point was they they seem to be trying to limit driver size based on some theoretical advantage larger drivers give. Some cars can fit bigger speakers than others in certain locations.
> 
> - A Civic can fit 5.25" speakers in the pillars and otherwise conform to rules for modified.
> - My Lancer cannot - I'd have to go extreme to fit that. I bet some trucks/SUV's with huge pillars could fit 5's without looking out of place.
> - A Maxima can fit 3 or 4" speakers in the dash corners and be in stock class.
> - I'd have to cut my dash and go into modex to do that.
> - A Vette can fit 10" speakers in the door and be in stock.
> - I'd have to cut tons of metal and rebuild my door and be in modex or extreme to do that.


To add: A MINI Cooper comes with dinky little 5" midbasses and an radio that has been integrated into the speedo and console. Stock class lets you upgrade the radio as long as you don't modify the opening. So that instantly bumps you up to Street if you want to run an aftermarket radio. Upgrading to 6.5" drivers in the doors bumped me up to Mod Street, even when there are people with stock 10's up front in stock and street classes (another gripe that I've gotten on with). So just to get on a level playing field with other cars, I'm already in mod street. Not to mention I'm already on a disadvantage with path length differences, lack of places to put amps, etc. Absolutely nowhere to mount kick panel midbasses no matter how much metal I cut. So I'm stuck with midbasses in the doors, which is a disadvantage for me now that I'm in ModEx and everyone runs kicks. Now that I've cut my dash for a center channel, I'd be in Extreme if I relocated the left/right midranges to being mounted in the dash (only allowed to have two holes in the dash as I read it, not three). So I'm stuck with dash pods, which I never wanted to do, or go in Extreme, where I'd never win in a million years. Yea, I've got a gripe with all of this. It's just plain unfair to compete with certain cars, even with the new rules. I've seen other MINIs do well, but not without considerably more work done than a more conventional car would need. When you factor in the fact that sponsored and professional teams can compete all the way down to Stock class, the playing field has basically been stacked against me and other diy guys that didn't buy our cars before we read the MECA rule book.


----------



## MacLeod

strakele said:


> The point was they they seem to be trying to limit driver size based on some theoretical advantage larger drivers give. Some cars can fit bigger speakers than others in certain locations.
> 
> - A Civic can fit 5.25" speakers in the pillars and otherwise conform to rules for modified.
> - My Lancer cannot - I'd have to go extreme to fit that. I bet some trucks/SUV's with huge pillars could fit 5's without looking out of place.
> - A Maxima can fit 3 or 4" speakers in the dash corners and be in stock class.
> - I'd have to cut my dash and go into modex to do that.
> - A Vette can fit 10" speakers in the door and be in stock.
> - I'd have to cut tons of metal and rebuild my door and be in modex or extreme to do that.
> 
> I know there isn't a rule in the books about door speaker/midbass size. But if they're trying to use some theoretical advantage of larger drivers to break up classes - i.e. 4" speaker in pillar = modified whereas 5" speaker in pillar = extreme, then why wouldn't they do the same for midbass? It's quite a huge 'advantage" to be able to fit a pair of 10's up front when most people are running 6.5's.


Its different when youre talking dash speakers vs door speakers. Me having a set of 3's molded in the A pillars is going to be at a pretty big disadvantage to you using a set of 5's in a big enclosure sitting on your dash. You've got everything from 50 Hz and up coming from there where Ive gotta cut mine off at 400 and split that between the midbass in the doors or kicks. That's why theyre limiting it there. A set of 3" Morel domes in the A pillars aren't gonna be as good as a set of Revelator 5's in the dash in a proper enclosure and on axis. The more octaves you can have coming from as few a set of drivers as possible is always best and when you can get those few drivers all above the dash and on axis, that's always gonna be a big head start on the guy running 3" mids and 6" midbass in the doors. 

However, you using 10's in your Vette doors wont be that big of an advantage over my 6's. For one, midbass is only 1 line of the score sheet and any quality set of 6's is capable of getting you 9's there so at most youll only get a point more than I would. You could pick up one with "up front bass" but 31 Hz rattling around in your door panels cant be good. 

The Maxima with stock dash speakers is a slight advantage but again, not much of one. Theyre still not in the best spot as theyre under the dash firing up so youre listening only to reflections and those are a ***** to tune. That advantage wont be that hard to overcome by a good tuner with just a pair of tweets on his dash.

Like I said, I think theyre trying to take the car out of the equation as much as possible and I totally agree with it because MECA has always been about having a place for every competitor. If its all about a certain car, then youre screwed if you bought something else. If the rules take the car out as much as possible and make it as much about the system and the tuning as possible, then everybody has a chance. I mean we've had a regular cab truck, a big ass Avalanche, a little tiny CRX and a NASCAR (!) all win the Culbertson Cup. Clearly it can be done in any car with the right competitor.


----------



## KP

Lets keep in mind the 4" driver/3.5" limitation is for the A Pillars only in Modex. 

Not all ModEx cars run midbass in the kicks.

My car is a 2005. Not sure how I could have read these rules in 2013 to make sure I would be in the 'lowest' class possible.

A majority of the posts look like a bunch of the 'grass is always greener on the other side' to me. Everything you CAN'T do would make your car better. If you look back over the years Street cars have consistantly been in the top 5 of all cars at Finals. (two way systems with door mounted 6.5's)

I'll check out Erin's car the next time at a show but I'm not convinced it is Extreme soley on the 3.5" from a panel rule. Seems everyone is assuming the 3.5" rule means protrudes INTO. Not sure how you can put a 5.25" between the two pillars and it is not more than 3.5"? Same deal the the before mentioned 3". Not sure how you can get a speaker that is 3.5" edge to edge alone in a pod and it is not more than 3.5"? If the rule is supposed to be protrudes INTO, then they both fit Modex by that rule. But thats not what it states.


----------



## thehatedguy

Show me a 5 that can play 50 hertz with any kind of output that can fit in pods on the top of a dash.


----------



## ErinH

There's definitely a need for you judges to get together on these things on a case by case basis. For example, Papasin and Kelly should email MECA and get a "once and for all" ruling so they don't have to be concerned with showing up at a comp and having the verifying judge tell them they're in a higher class. This happened at Finals
Last tear to two people. if the competitors were trying to sneak around that would be different (and, IMHO, bannable) but if its just a difference of opinion or oversight from a judge then thats a problem. If there were a way for you guys to all make a decision MECA wide for a person, there wouldn't be a concern with this happening. They'd just pull out the email from their glovebox and show that the ruling was made. But this is really assuming that all of you guys (judges for verification) are in the loop together. It shouldn't be hard. A few emails on the matter between all you guys and a final ruling... Done. Unless it needs to be seen in person, which is kind of what gets to the root of the issue. 

As it stands, based on what you've said, Kirk, it seems this really is something all you judges need to nail down before the season goes in too far. The fact that you and Matt seem to have different views on the rule shows that it could be an issue for a competitor in the lanes the day of a show. 

Just my $.02...


----------



## ErinH

MacLeod said:


> Its different when youre talking dash speakers vs door speakers. Me having a set of 3's molded in the A pillars is going to be at a pretty big disadvantage to you using a set of 5's in a big enclosure sitting on your dash. You've got everything from 50 Hz and up coming from there where Ive gotta cut mine off at 400 and split that between the midbass in the doors or kicks. That's why theyre limiting it there. A set of 3" Morel domes in the A pillars aren't gonna be as good as a set of Revelator 5's in the dash in a proper enclosure and on axis. The more octaves you can have coming from as few a set of drivers as possible is always best and when you can get those few drivers all above the dash and on axis, that's always gonna be a big head start on the guy running 3" mids and 6" midbass in the doors.
> 
> However, you using 10's in your Vette doors wont be that big of an advantage over my 6's. For one, midbass is only 1 line of the score sheet and any quality set of 6's is capable of getting you 9's there so at most youll only get a point more than I would. You could pick up one with "up front bass" but 31 Hz rattling around in your door panels cant be good.
> 
> The Maxima with stock dash speakers is a slight advantage but again, not much of one. Theyre still not in the best spot as theyre under the dash firing up so youre listening only to reflections and those are a ***** to tune. That advantage wont be that hard to overcome by a good tuner with just a pair of tweets on his dash.
> 
> Like I said, I think theyre trying to take the car out of the equation as much as possible and I totally agree with it because MECA has always been about having a place for every competitor. If its all about a certain car, then youre screwed if you bought something else. If the rules take the car out as much as possible and make it as much about the system and the tuning as possible, then everybody has a chance. I mean we've had a regular cab truck, a big ass Avalanche, a little tiny CRX and a NASCAR (!) all win the Culbertson Cup. Clearly it can be done in any car with the right competitor.


The only thing ill say to this is simply that we were told last week the rule was made from a safety POV. Now it's a means to level the playing field. Is it both, then? I could care less the reason because once a rule is made, that's it. But the rationale changing from last week seems out of place here.


----------



## tintbox

Like I said, I think theyre trying to take the car out of the equation as much as possible and I totally agree with it because MECA has always been about having a place for every competitor. If its all about a certain car, then youre screwed if you bought something else. If the rules take the car out as much as possible and make it as much about the system and the tuning as possible, then everybody has a chance. I mean we've had a regular cab truck, a big ass Avalanche, a little tiny CRX and a NASCAR (!) all win the Culbertson Cup. Clearly it can be done in any car with the right competitor.

Well said!


----------



## michaelsil1

thehatedguy said:


> Show me a 5 that can play 50 hertz with any kind of output that can fit in pods on the top of a dash.


Maybe:

High End subwoofer Focal Utopia Be 13 WS for audiophile Car audio installation


----------



## thehatedguy

He is talking about to use with a tweeter in a 2 way.


----------



## michaelsil1

thehatedguy said:


> He is talking about to use with a tweeter in a 2 way.


Like you said, not going to happen with any kind of authority.


----------



## ErinH

AcuraTLSQ said:


> If you look back over the years Street cars have consistantly been in the top 5 of all cars at Finals. (two way systems with door mounted 6.5's)



there's so much truth to this. some of the best systems I've heard are very simple 2-way + sub (Cook, Matt's (I think it was when I heard it), yours a couple years back, etc). I sometimes wonder why I went the route I chose but am so locked in I can't let myself go back.


----------



## MacLeod

thehatedguy said:


> Show me a 5 that can play 50 hertz with any kind of output that can fit in pods on the top of a dash.


Who's mounting 5's in pods? We're not talking about dropping some drivers into some PVC end caps here, we're talking about actual enclosures like Steve Cooks or that Dodge Ram posted a few pages back. Those aren't "pods", those are outright enclosures. You take a quality 5 like say a Scan Revelator, build an enclosure for it around .25 ft3 and it could hit 50 Hz with little problem. Even if it can only do 63, itll still go a hell of a lot lower than a 4" midrange. That's why I don't mind the 5" line in the sand. 

Now I know what youre going to do, youre going to go dig up some obscure 4 thatll play down to 15 Hz.  But the fact remains, 4's are generally a midrange driver while 5+ is where they can start pulling some serious midbass duty. 



bikinpunk said:


> The only thing ill say to this is simply that we were told last week the rule was made from a safety POV. Now it's a means to level the playing field. Is it both, then? I could care less the reason because once a rule is made, that's it. But the rationale changing from last week seems out of place here.


I hear ya brother. Im totally guessing here. Im not a judge or on the R&E committee so I have no inside knowledge at all and I don't have any vested interest in ModEx vs Extreme as Im all the way down here in Mod Street. Im just putting out what I think MECA's intent is with these rules.


----------



## michaelsil1

bikinpunk said:


> there's so much truth to this. some of the best systems I've heard are very simple 2-way + sub (Cook, Matt's (I think it was when I heard it), yours a couple years back, etc). I sometimes wonder why I went the route I chose but am so locked in I can't let myself go back.


My buddy has gone one step further and is down to three drivers.

Two five inch full range and one sub.


----------



## ErinH

I've heard rumors of such...


----------



## Matt R

Man, this really isnt that difficult. 

You can do up to a 4 inch driver in a pillar or pod. That evens the playing field, again like Mcloud said, for cars with or without dash speakers.

You can put a 4 inch driver and sink it half way into the pillar trim and it wont stick out further than 3.5 inches from where the factory trim was. 

This rule really does take the majority of the "car" out of the equation. 

We want people to be able to come and be competitive in whatever class they qualify for regardless of the vehicle.

If you want to use a speaker larger than 4 inches in an aftermarket location do it. Depending on how you do it, it will place you in different classes. 

Sink a larger driver down into the dash and you can qualify for modex. This, IMO is a disadvantage to extreme class below.

Put a larger driver on top of the dash or in the pillar and its extreme. This is a clear advantage over Modex.

You can put 10's in your doors in Modified, like McLoud said again, it's not a huge advantage over other midbass options.


----------



## KP

Selvidge won the Cup with 5" midbass in 06.(?) 

A brief history of why some of this isn't making sense to the old timers. The classes were Street, Street +, Modified, Modified +, Modex. Modex +, Master. 7 classes. But it was too difficult to keep up with who was + and who was not because every sound deadening Co. and wire Co. in existance was sending out crap, heavily discounted. (just as an example that comes to mind. There were others instances) PLUS classes were eliminated. New structure is the current. With internet sales no one pays retail anymore. The classes have a pretty decent flow from one to the other.


----------



## bertholomey

Well said Mike!


----------



## Thunderplains

MECA question.. 

Read thru the rules last night and just so I am clear, I have tweets and mid (3") in the pillars and from the pillar to the highest point, they stick out about 3.45" I am trying to figure out from the rules, what class this will put me in..
Outside of the pods, everything else remains stock (openings, HU placement, etc)

Thanks


----------



## MacLeod

Sounds like Modified to me.


----------



## BigRed

So I have a competitor out here in California with a Smart Car that comes stock with an 8" sub in the dash behind the glove box. He has competed in Street this season. Last show there was a protest about his sub.

The rule states "Unless mounted in a *factory location*, subwoofer(s) must be installed in the trunk/cargo area."

The sub is mounted in the factory location, using the factory brackets. He has provided proof from the manufacturer that it comes with a sub in that location and the size, with part numbers etc.

The rules and ethics committee has ruled that it is not in "the spirit" of the rule and disqualified all his points in street. wtf?? I know there are some grey areas in the rulebook that have been discussed, but the sub rule in my opinion is pretty straightforward.

Anybody have any thoughts on this?


----------



## DAT

BigRed said:


> So I have a competitor out here in California with a Smart Car that comes stock with an 8" sub in the dash behind the glove box. He has competed in Street this season. Last show there was a protest about his sub.
> 
> The rule states "Unless mounted in a *factory location*, subwoofer(s) must be installed in the trunk/cargo area."
> 
> The sub is mounted in the factory location, using the factory brackets. He has provided proof from the manufacturer that it comes with a sub in that location and the size, with part numbers etc.
> 
> The rules and ethics committee has ruled that it is not in "the spirit" of the rule and disqualified all his points in street. wtf?? I know there are some grey areas in the rulebook that have been discussed, but the sub rule in my opinion is pretty straightforward.
> 
> Anybody have any thoughts on this?




I agree with you Jim, the "Smart Car" should not he disqualified for all the points.


----------



## papasin

My wife and I will elaborate further when we calm down a bit, but it's more than just the points. The way this matter was handled also is a bit (how can I say it), wtf as Jim put it.

We initially received a ruling after following all the steps were asked of us to provide the necessary documentation from the dealership, got all the part numbers from a Smart/MB dealer, etc.

The initial ruling was we were written a formal email that got the verbal ok from Steve Stern that the protest was cleared and the car was ok for street.

This morning, I got a phone call saying the R&E committee has overturned that ruling because what is printed in the rulebook vs. what is the "spirit" of the rule is different. That is my biggest beef.

If the rule is factory enclosure vs. factory location, then the rulebook needs to state that and that should be made clear NEXT season. If not, as competitors, we should not be expected to guess what the "spirit" of the rule is.


----------



## darrenforeal

*WTF*....... that's unacceptable.


----------



## AccordUno

<face palm> I would call Steve Stern and talk to him.


----------



## tnaudio

Is your sub not in the factory encloser? I can kinda see this if it is not. Much like you can't build a speaker encloser in the door for your speakers in this class. You can only use the car as it is pretty much.


----------



## ErinH

did your car actually come with an 8" sub and you replaced it with an aftermarket, or did you get a model without the sub and then add the OEM parts to add the sub? 

I'm just curious of the details here.


----------



## AccordUno

Erin, let's play devil's advocate here, let's say he didn't get it, but it's offered and he installed an enclosure where the factory one would mount to, would this kick him out of that class? 

Just asking because, he could have opted out, but it's still a factory sub location..


----------



## BigRed

The rule says factory location not factory enclosure. My take is that it should be allowed for the year with the meca r&e defining the rules more clearly for next year. He originally was asked to provide that a sub came stock in that location and he did. Then He was told that it wasn't in the spirit. To me, that ruling should have been addressed first not after he gave what they asked


----------



## Darth SQ

Sorry to read this Richard.
Please pass that onto your wonderful wife for me.
You and I had talked about this recently and I had thought it had already been put to rest.
Such bs.
Did they put the decision in writing because I would like to read it.
You have my support in this matter and am willing to sign a protest sheet or make some calls on your behalf brotha.


Bret
PPI-ART COLLECTOR


----------



## ErinH

AccordUno said:


> Erin, let's play devil's advocate here


I'm not saying it's right or wrong. I'm just asking the question.


----------



## chefhow

I would request a refund of my money for the show(s), a reimbursement of funds for my time, gas and related expenses for the day(s) at the shows and send back the trophies once I received them.
If Steve Stern made a ruling allowing you to do this and move forward with the install in Street Class than this should be a non issue. Steve is the owner of MECA, he is the Commish of MECA and he has the final say as I have been told verification Judges be damned. 
I would protest this TO STEVE NOT THE R&E group and send the letter Steve gave you in writing again with it.
This is fishy and there is more to it than being told from an R&E standpoint

And if a factory sub came with the car in the dash there should be ABSOLUTELY NO QUESTION about it being in Street, technically he could have competed in Stock providing he didnt build a pillars based on the rules of both Street and Stock class.


----------



## ErinH

chefhow said:


> I would request a refund of my money for the show(s), a reimbursement of funds for my time, gas and related expenses for the day(s) at the shows and send back the trophies once I received them.
> If Steve Stern made a ruling allowing you to do this and move forward with the install in Street Class than this should be a non issue. Steve is the owner of MECA, he is the Commish of MECA and he has the final say as I have been told verification Judges be damned.
> I would protest this TO STEVE NOT THE R&E group and send the letter Steve gave you in writing again with it.
> This is fishy and there is more to it than being told from an R&E standpoint


Agreed. I would at least ask for my points to be applied to the class they say I belong in (if you even want to bother). Or ask for my money back as your goal was to compete and make it to finals, falling and being judged under the rules which you judged by numerous times before.


----------



## chefhow

bikinpunk said:


> Agreed. I would at least ask for my points to be applied to the class they say I belong in (if you even want to bother). Or ask for my money back as your goal was to compete and make it to finals, falling and being judged under the rules *which you judged by numerous times before*.


AND THE COMMISH ALLOWED IN A LETTER!!


----------



## Mic10is

chefhow said:


> I would request a refund of my money for the show(s), a reimbursement of funds for my time, gas and related expenses for the day(s) at the shows and send back the trophies once I received them.
> If Steve Stern made a ruling allowing you to do this and move forward with the install in Street Class than this should be a non issue. Steve is the owner of MECA, he is the Commish of MECA and he has the final say as I have been told verification Judges be damned.
> I would protest this TO STEVE NOT THE R&E group and send the letter Steve gave you in writing again with it.
> This is fishy and there is more to it than being told from an R&E standpoint


I Agree
Something sounds very Fishy

One of my biggest "issues" with MECA was this whole "spirit of the rule" and the actual Rule.

Why have a Rulebook is the "spirit" of the rule differs from the actual rule.

Also, as a Judge, Its nearly impossible to explain to a new competitor that what the rule says isnt what it actually means....


----------



## chefhow

Mic10is said:


> I Agree
> Something sounds very Fishy
> 
> One of my biggest "issues" with MECA was this whole "spirit of the rule" and the actual Rule.
> 
> Why have a Rulebook is the "spirit" of the rule differs from the actual rule.
> 
> Also, as a Judge, Its nearly impossible to explain to a new competitor that what the rule says isnt what it actually means....


And even if I allow something as a judge and event coordinator and you make it all the way to finals and the verification judge who has followed the book to a tee has allowed it and you cleared it with the OWNER of MECA you may be DQ'd over the spirit of the rule vs the written rule itself at Finals...

PS: the spirit of the rule may be interpreted as seen fit by the judge that day.


----------



## Mic10is

chefhow said:


> And even if I allow something as a judge and event coordinator and you make it all the way to finals and the verification judge who has followed the book to a tee has allowed it and you cleared it with the OWNER of MECA you may be DQ'd over the spirit of the rule vs the written rule itself at Finals...
> 
> PS: the spirit of the rule may be interpreted as seen fit by the judge that day.



HAHAHAHAHAHA You said Verification at Finals....yeh bc thats something that doesnt get overturned During the show:laugh::laugh:


----------



## asota

If the car came with a sub up front and even if you replaced it with the same size sub it is in the spirit of the rule and I can see Steve approving it and should. If the enclosure is modified in any way or worse yet another enclosure is built this is not in the spirit of a stock class car and should not have been approved. Were any modifications made to the original enclosure with Steve's knowledge?


----------



## SQHemi

BigRed said:


> So I have a competitor out here in California with a Smart Car that comes stock with an 8" sub in the dash behind the glove box. He has competed in Street this season. Last show there was a protest about his sub.
> 
> The rule states "Unless mounted in a *factory location*, subwoofer(s) must be installed in the trunk/cargo area."
> 
> The sub is mounted in the factory location, using the factory brackets. He has provided proof from the manufacturer that it comes with a sub in that location and the size, with part numbers etc.
> 
> The rules and ethics committee has ruled that it is not in "the spirit" of the rule and disqualified all his points in street. wtf?? I know there are some grey areas in the rulebook that have been discussed, but the sub rule in my opinion is pretty straightforward.
> 
> Anybody have any thoughts on this?


My thoughts are regardless of weather the enclosure should be allowed or not, the disqualification of points is unfair, unneeded and disrespectful to the competitor. Papasin and his wife are avid competitors and have been fully forth coming on the placement of everything in all of their vehicles and even asked ahead of time about this situation. Nothing hidden, no secrets, No BS, no drama. Stripping them of their points does absolutely nothing for the sport and has nothing but negative ramifications for the spirit of competition. They are in a grey area for sure and further clarification of the rules is needed for instances such as this but it is not their fault the rules aren't clearer. Meca should REINSTATE their points and clarify the rules. Upon rule clarification, I'm quite sure papasin and his wife will adjust as needed to comply and be in the class they wish to be in. No harm no foul. Get it fixed before state finals and world finals where all this really matters. But to punish people for lack of clarification is just wrong IMO. Last time I checked we were trying to build the competition scene and papasin and his wife are positive members of the competition community and should be treated as such.
Just my $.02


----------



## Justin Zazzi

Having worked side by side with Papasin and his family I echo SQHemi's protests and requests. The "spirit" of competition is to promote the sport and hobby, and Papasin and his family do more than most.


----------



## BigRed

asota said:


> If the car came with a sub up front and even if you replaced it with the same size sub it is in the spirit of the rule and I can see Steve approving it and should. If the enclosure is modified in any way or worse yet another enclosure is built this is not in the spirit of a stock class car and should not have been approved. Were any modifications made to the original enclosure with Steve's knowledge?


This car is in "street" class, not stock. in the street class, you can cut 1/2" of your doors to fit aftermarket speakers in the factory location. the rule also allows a sub in "factory location" Richard put a same size sub in the factory location.

Also, the R&E wanted proof that car came with an up front sub, which Richard and his family provided, along with a letter from Smart supporting it. You can actually purchase the car with 2 different locations for a sub. Furthermore, according to the rules, R&E had 48 hours to rule on the protest. Richard provided proof over 2 weeks ago, but got a call today indicating he was disqualified based on their 2 week discussions?? I'm probably not reading that rule right either


----------



## asota

Stand corrected street class does allow some mods of factory speaker mounting I thought he was in stock. If he put the same size sub in factory enclosure even if it required a little modding to fit IMO R&E blew this call.


----------



## claydo

My thoughts here are not if the sub was placed anywhere in the car........stock or not.......my thoughts are how in the hell can the r/e guys go back on a formal letter from the commissioner of an organization giving the said smart car permission to compete in a given class. For this to take place AFTER this letter, and subsequent competitions is an outrage. Not to mention a blatant disrespect to the big guy's call.


----------



## claydo

If I was the comish......... I would be pissed........


----------



## Darth SQ

SQHemi said:


> My thoughts are regardless of weather the enclosure should be allowed or not, the disqualification of points is unfair, unneeded and disrespectful to the competitor. Papasin and his wife are avid competitors and have been fully forth coming on the placement of everything in all of their vehicles and even asked ahead of time about this situation. Nothing hidden, no secrets, No BS, no drama. Stripping them of their points does absolutely nothing for the sport and has nothing but negative ramifications for the spirit of competition. They are in a grey area for sure and further clarification of the rules is needed for instances such as this but it is not their fault the rules aren't clearer. Meca should REINSTATE their points and clarify the rules. Upon rule clarification, I'm quite sure papasin and his wife will adjust as needed to comply and be in the class they wish to be in. No harm no foul. Get it fixed before state finals and world finals where all this really matters. But to punish people for lack of clarification is just wrong IMO. Last time I checked we were trying to build the competition scene and papasin and his wife are positive members of the competition community and should be treated as such.
> Just my $.02


And their kids compete as well.
How many others in MECA can say that the entire family competes?
His Honda, wife's Smart, and the kids Power Wheels Smart Car in spl.


Bret
PPI-ART COLLECTOR


----------



## dietDrThunder

What a surprise, yet another MECA rules f#ck story. These problems are caused by a fundamental failure in MECA, and are why I stopped competing after a _very_ enjoyable start last year.

What nobody gets (not Steve, and not the R&E committee) is that in order to have any meaningful competition with integrity, the rulebook _must_ be the law, end of story. This situation with the Smart car clearly being 100% within the stated rules with no grey area at all, and being smacked by R&E for...well, I have no idea why, is absurd.

If the Smart car pointed out something about the Smart Car setup that folks realized needed to be addressed in the rulebook, then they should address it in the 2014 rule book. It's too late now...the rules are out. People build their cars according to the current rules, because they trust that the rules aren't going to change (ya good luck with that).

The next time you're at a show and there are 3 people in SQ and you wonder why, come back to this thread.


----------



## darrenforeal

what a **** show. There has to be some underlying stuff to this. Some interested parties that have sway with the R&E committee. What other explanation is feasible?


----------



## dietDrThunder

darrenforeal said:


> what a **** show. There has to be some underlying stuff to this. Some interested parties that have sway with the R&E committee. What other explanation is feasible?


Honestly, as bitter as I am about this subject, I don't believe that there is any conspiracy, or ill will, or any other such motivation. I'm not here to rehash my situation, but if you're interested go back in this thread and look for my posts. My situation was also ridiculous, but not as obvious and blatant as the Smart Car thing...this one is _much_ worse. It is simply incompetence on a fundamental level. 

The plain fact that the rules committee completely ignored the, you know...RULES, is the best possible evidence of this.


----------



## slade1274

<<<does not regret giving up MECA competition after 2010 finals.


----------



## ErinH

slade1274 said:


> <<<does not regret giving up MECA competition after 2010 finals.


I'm about one final decision from being right there with you.


----------



## ErinH

dietDrThunder said:


> If the Smart car pointed out something about the Smart Car setup that folks realized needed to be addressed in the rulebook, then they should address it in the *2014 rule book*. It's too late now...the rules are out. People build their cars according to the current rules, because they trust that the rules aren't going to change (ya good luck with that).


I agree. 

I went through a rules change issue in February when they changed the rules 2 weeks after my first show. Once the rules are finalized and posted that should be it until the next season. The fact that it seems to be a moving target creates issues as evidenced.


----------



## slade1274

bikinpunk said:


> I'm about one final decision from being right there with you.


The move to Florida made the decision that much easier..... 

Don't envy you guys passionate about the hobby that live right in the heart of competition locations.... it would be truly hard to step away from the people moreso than the competitions.

Hence I make the crazy drives to attend the GTGs.


----------



## ErinH

Honestly, if there were more GTGs I wouldn't worry so much about competing. It's fun. But lately it's been a stressor for me and I've been considering walking away for a while.


----------



## MrsPapasin

Thank you everyone for the overwhelming support. Unfortunately, we feel MECA has not responded in an acceptable manner.

Unlike it has been portrayed, we are not asking for an exception to the rule. We are simply asking that MECA honor the rules for Street class which clearly spells out this matter as written and honor the official ruling we received from the MECA CA event director. Steve was cc'd on the ruling and the CA event director verbally confirmed with Steve before sending the ruling to us. We even responded back to both our CA event director and Steve Stern thanking them for their time and for the ruling. Steve was cc'd the entire time what had transpired and if he did not agree with the ruling that was sent to us he did nothing to put a stop to it. No email, no phone call. Nothing other than giving the verbal go-ahead to our CA event director that it was ok to send us that initial ruling. That was May 8. Now here we are two weeks later.

In his email Steve mentions that we found a gray area in the stock location up front sub rule. I'm completely baffled by what is being said, as stock, street, and mod street all indicate the exact same rule with respect to the subwoofer installation and placement. We are not sure if the facts are all straight.

At this point, we are not sure how to proceed. Given the lack of clarity in following the actual rulebook by the entire MECA organization, we cannot in good conscience teach our children that what is written in a rulebook is actually not the rules, but that the rules are left up to those who interpret them whatever way they choose to see fit. 

We do not expect MECA to be perfect. The rules were written by people and people make mistakes. But to make the competitor pay for how the rules are written and to reinterpret the rules along the way is unethical. The only amicable and correct resolution in our humble opinion is to follow the rules as written this year, and make sure it is corrected next year.

We are deeply disappointed with the MECA organization's response. We feel that the integrity of the MECA organization and the "spirit" of the car audio sport has been tarnished.

Again thank you everyone for the overwhelming support. We are truly appreciative for all the kind words and support. We could not have imagined the backing that the community has shown for our situation and for us. For this we are thankful and will take with us no matter the outcome of this situation.


----------



## RenoAutoSound

Very well written! I sincerely hope that MECA does make this right.


----------



## Darth SQ

Steve,
I read your e-mail that you sent her today.
Just re-instate her points, say "our bad", and have here compete in mod from here on out.

Easy, simple, done.


Bret
PPI-ART COLLECTOR


----------



## Darth SQ

RenoAutoSound said:


> Very well written! I sincerely hope that MECA does make this right.


According to the pdf attachment, this case is over as far as Steve sees it. 

Reinstate the damn points and move her to mod.

Bret
PPI-ART COLLECTOR


----------



## MrsPapasin

PPI-ART COLLECTOR said:


> Steve,
> I read your e-mail that you sent her today.
> Just re-instate her points, say "our bad", and have here compete in mod from here on out.
> 
> Easy, simple, done.
> 
> 
> Bret
> PPI-ART COLLECTOR


Bret,

I think you missed the point. I can't teach my children that it's ok to have one set of rules written up and then have another completely made up one that overrides what's written. That's like telling my children that's it's ok to play a game with their friends and then change the rules along the way.

EDIT: Nor do I think it kosher to tell someone one thing and then retract it. CA event director with Steve cc'd should be official enough. So saying that he had no record of it is null and void.


----------



## RenoAutoSound

PPI-ART COLLECTOR said:


> According to the pdf attachment, this case is over as far as Steve sees it.
> 
> Reinstate the damn points and move her to mod.
> 
> Bret
> PPI-ART COLLECTOR


I agree!! the rules have been written for this year. Allow them to keep competing in the class that they are in. If the rules need to be reworded or changed then do it in the off season.


----------



## Kevin K

I agree. We need people to be excited about competing, not leaving


----------



## Neil_J

Can someone explain to us not in-the-know what the controversy was over the Smart Car? What exactly happened?


----------



## highly

Neil_J said:


> Can someone explain to us not in-the-know what the controversy was over the Smart Car? What exactly happened?


http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum/1893444-post401.html

^this sums it up, and the situation is added to between that post and here...


----------



## Neil_J

Thanks.


----------



## decibelle

Wow, come on MECA, get your **** together. The way this is going, is only a matter of time until more people are affected by the rules inconsistencies than people who are not. This is no way to promote MECA nor sportsmanship. In my short time competing I've seen far too many people drop out of competition for the same stupid reason. I think its safe to say that most of us compete in large part because we enjoy the friendly competition amongst our buddies, and when they're no longer there anymore because of asinine stuff like this, the hobby loses its primary representatives - us.

MECA conduct needs to change or there won't be any MECA in a few short years.


----------



## Team Bassick - Kimo

I have responded to Richard and Linda and they can choose to share but, looks as if the SMART has to be reclassified and here are some options: 

- Remove enclosure and reinstall manufacture enclosure.
- Disconnect enclosure and compete with or without a sub enclosure in cargo area.
- Rebuild the vehicle for another class 

Whatever they choose to do the points will be moved to their new class for this season.


----------



## BigRed

Kimo, first and foremost I want to commend you for hosting shows in all of california for MECA. Its not easy, and I want to also share with you that this is by no means your fault.

I'm even more blow away that stearn himself cannot admit fault in the ruling of the smart car. Its absolutely clear to everybody else but him.

Let me wrap it up in two paragraphs: In the MECA rule book that is written by R&E and stearn himself, it says "Unless in a *factory location*, subs must be blah blah blah" The sub IS in a factory location..period.

In stearns reponse about the smart car he says "the rule should have been written differently, it should have said "Unless in factory location and in a factory enclosure". Well hey einstien, re-write the rules for next year covering that. Instead you want to change it because you and R&E did'nt write it correctly for this year?? wtf??

Hey Meca, you're about to lose all of the california competition for next year because you are clearly displaying no integrity in your own rules. I find it even more odd that NOBODY from R&E is responding here, but they were quick to defend when Erin, Richard, and others pointed out that MECA wanted to change the rules AFTER they came out, and it did'nt sit well with others.

Grow some balls and explain to us right here why this make sense R&E.

This is wrong wrong wrong.


----------



## decibelle

^^ Where is the "thanks" button when you need it..


----------



## badfish

BigRed said:


> Kimo, first and foremost I want to commend you for hosting shows in all of california for MECA. Its not easy, and I want to also share with you that this is by no means your fault.
> 
> I'm even more blow away that stearn himself cannot admit fault in the ruling of the smart car. Its absolutely clear to everybody else but him.
> 
> Let me wrap it up in two paragraphs: In the MECA rule book that is written by R&E and stearn himself, it says "Unless in a *factory location*, subs must be blah blah blah" The sub IS in a factory location..period.
> 
> In stearns reponse about the smart car he says "the rule should have been written differently, it should have said "Unless in factory location and in a factory enclosure". Well hey einstien, re-write the rules for next year covering that. Instead you want to change it because you and R&E did'nt write it correctly for this year?? wtf??
> 
> Hey Meca, you're about to lose all of the california competition for next year because you are clearly displaying no integrity in your own rules. I find it even more odd that NOBODY from R&E is responding here, but they were quick to defend when Erin, Richard, and others pointed out that MECA wanted to change the rules AFTER they came out, and it did'nt sit well with others.
> 
> Grow some balls and explain to us right here why this make sense R&E.
> 
> This is wrong wrong wrong.


. 2x


----------



## RenoAutoSound

badfish said:


> . 2x


3x!!


----------



## TOOSTUBBORN2FAIL

As I've told Jim before, I was on the fence about competing, simply because I didn't want to follow a set of rules for my build, putting me in extreme (with no prior experience), but this is enough that I won't compete in MECA, and can't recommend for anyone else to compete with them either. I think I will be sending an email to them stating such as well.


----------



## MacLeod

Gotta admit, this does seem a little ridiculous. Its like the "flush tweeters in Street" controversy from last year. The rules plainly stated flush mounted tweets were allowed in Street but the R&E guys read between the lines and came to the conclusion that they weren't allowed on the dash regardless of there being no mention of this in the actual rules.

Now this fiasco. 

Im a long time diehard defender of MECA but I have to finally admit that it does seem like theyre nickel and diming the rules a little too much. I liked it better when it was just simple and it was based on where the speakers were located and you weren't getting bumped 4 classes up because a bracket was 1/2" too long or something totally trivial like that. 

People are upset every year with the rules and such but there should be no "spirit of the rules" in a decision. Don't start tripping competitors up on technicalities. This is a sure fire way to run a lot of people out of the sport or at least out of MECA. If some crafty and innovative competitor comes up with something different that's not covered in the rules like this Smart car thing, and the R&E guys don't like it, change it next year. Don't start making rules up or finding things that simply aren't there right in the middle of the season.


----------



## BigRed

I totally agree with you Aaron

By no means should this be twisted into this competitor was actively looking for a way to bend the rules. Meca is trying to make it seem like this competitor found a "grey area" and wants an exception to the rule. this is just plain stupid. They put a stereo system in a car, and decided after several months of having it, to compete with it. They looked in the rulebook to see where they would be classified. sub is in factory location...check! looks like street...confirmed by several meca judges...check! A protest occurs, and Meca decides their rule was written incorrectly, and says they don't belong in that class, and boldly gives an example of what the rule "should of said"

Congrats Meca, you just lost the nicest family that participated in Meca that I know because you can't follow your own rules.

I was a long time supporter of Meca, but having no integrity with the rules, I cannot faithfully spend one more minute competing, nor helping anybody that chooses to compete in Meca.


----------



## strakele

After all of this, I think MECA would be making a huge mistake not to reverse the decision. It's not too late to make it right.


----------



## darrenforeal

BigRed said:


> ,I cannot faithfully spend one more minute competing, nor helping anybody that chooses to compete in Meca.


+1

bush league BS. Who's to say they won't change the rules on me too? I had my install confirmed by a R & E member. But now my confidence is shaken; and I don't want to put myself through potential stress and anger when they change the rules again.


IASCA anyone???


----------



## Darth SQ

BigRed said:


> I totally agree with you Aaron
> 
> By no means should this be twisted into this competitor was actively looking for a way to bend the rules. Meca is trying to make it seem like this competitor found a "grey area" and wants an exception to the rule. this is just plain stupid. They put a stereo system in a car, and decided after several months of having it, to compete with it. They looked in the rulebook to see where they would be classified. sub is in factory location...check! looks like street...confirmed by several meca judges...check! A protest occurs, and Meca decides their rule was written incorrectly, and says they don't belong in that class, and boldly gives an example of what the rule "should of said"
> 
> Congrats Meca, you just lost the nicest family that participated in Meca that I know because you can't follow your own rules.
> 
> I was a long time supporter of Meca, but having no integrity with the rules, I cannot faithfully spend one more minute competing, nor helping anybody that chooses to compete in Meca.


Wow Jim!
That's a huge loss for the California MECA community.
I know all that you've done to help out and all the traveling you do to compete.
It's a damn shame.

To Steve and the R&E Committee, 
You've just lost Jim and all that he does for everyone and that's a big ass deal.
Others have posted they're quitting MECA as well.
I myself will go on record that once my build is completed and judged at a few events this year, that I will not re up my MECA registration for 2014.

*I TRULY BELIEVE YOU JUST DON'T HAVE A GRASP ON THE GRAVITY OF THE SITUATION YOU"VE CREATED OUT HERE!*
*DON'T BELIEVE ME? ASK YOUR CALIFORNIA REP KIMO AND I ASSURE YOU WILL GET A PROPER UNDERSTANDING ON THE MAGNATUDE OF YOUR MISTAKE!*

And your choosing to be silent in this thread has made it all even worse.



You're going to lose ALL of California if you don't make this right. 


Bret
PPI-ART COLLECTOR


----------



## Neil_J

I've had it as well. I'm not going to compete any more because apparently the higher-ups at MECA don't know how to articulate their thoughts well on pen and paper in the english language. I've already left fuming from two different events over the judges' different interpretations of the rules. Add to that all the crap pulled on other members of this site based on interpretation and technicalities. Now this (I hear-by name it the SmartcarGate scandal). Unlike a lot of others here, I've got little to lose. I've talked to a lot of others here who feel just as strongly, but dare not say anything.

MECA committee members: Take a ****ing course at your local community college, guys. Learn the ancient art of wordsmithing. If I find any relevant books on the subject, I'll be sure to send them your way. Yea, some of you guys may even be engineers but even you guys need a refresher every now and then.


----------



## strakele

I'm trying to get people with some sway in this organization to see this and do something to make it right. I've had fun in the short time I've been involved in MECA and don't want to see it lose a large member base.


----------



## MacLeod

The problem isn't with the rules, it never has been really. It doesn't matter to me if it has to be a stock enclosure or not or if flush mounted tweeters should be allowed or not. The issue is that its NOT listed in the rules and so SHOULD BE ALLOWED. This "spirit of the rules" is horseshit. If the rules do not say the enclosure has to be the stock one, then it doesn't. Plain and simple. If the R&E guys feel that it should remain a stock enclosure then the rules should be changed for NEXT year, not halfway thru this season. And whoopy if they did let them carry over their points, now theyre in Modified competing with a Street install. So all the work they did this season is right down the toilet because MECA left something out of the rules. The email Steve sent said that the rules "should have read" a certain way. I understand that but THEY DONT. Therefore, a custom enclosure in the stock location is NOT against the rules in Street.

There is no way MECA can make rules governing everything conceivable and think of every possible modification, I totally get that and will defend them to the death over that. But when theyre changing the rules on a whim based on something as hokey as "spirit" then that's when Ill begrudgingly join the chorus of the pissed. 

Rules are worthless if they can be changed mid season. This isn't the NFL where they can change a rule and its "from now on, we do it this way". Everybody was on the same playing field before and after and there is no competitive advantage. But if you build a system according to the rules, spend tons of time and money designing, building and tuning it then spend a few months hitting shows and working out the kinks THEN halfway thru youre told, "oops, wrong class. Sorry youre getting bumped 2 classes and all the work you've done to date was for nothing", well that's just wrong on so many levels.


----------



## KP

Possible to post pics of the OEM sub enclosure removed and the one actually in the car? 

A quick Google search pulled up this aftermarket enclosure: Smart Car Under Dash 8" Subwoofer Enclosure only

I can only imagine there must be a big difference between the OEM and whats in there for them to pull the spirit thing.........


----------



## chefhow

It used factory location and mounting brackets Kirk, the rules only state that it must be in the factory location. They followed the rules as written, what it looks like doesn't make a damn but of difference.


----------



## KP

I haven't seen the pics to know its in the same location. Was the after market box built larger and perhaps the location/angle of the sub changed but a box is in the same area as OEM and uses the OEM bracket? Why not just use the OEM box as MECA has said can be done? Maybe it is the same, just want to see.

I cannot jump on the lynching until I know all the facts.


----------



## papasin

Team Bassick - Kimo said:


> I have responded to Richard and Linda and they can choose to share but, looks as if the SMART has to be reclassified and here are some options:
> 
> - Remove enclosure and reinstall manufacture enclosure.
> - Disconnect enclosure and compete with or without a sub enclosure in cargo area.
> - Rebuild the vehicle for another class
> 
> Whatever they choose to do the points will be moved to their new class for this season.


Guys and gals,

This has been a little much for us, so we're taking a step back. I have emailed Kimo, Steve, and Fred (the lead judge at the show). I'm attaching it here for everyone. We wish everyone the very best this Memorial Day.

All the best to everyone,
- Richard, Linda, and family


----------



## asota

The problem is street class only allows limited modification of the factory speaker mounting there really is no gray area.


----------



## MacLeod

No, the problem is that the rules say nothing about having to use the stock enclosure. All it says is that you have to use the stock location and if the stock location is up front under the dash, you can use it. If they want to include stock enclosure in next year's rules, that's totally fine but theyre not in there right now so to penalize a competitor halfway thru a season like this when they were following the letter of the rules just isn't right. 

This is the 2nd time this season that they've changed the rules AFTER the season started (not to mention the flush tweeter thing last year). Erin is now in Extreme because of the first little snafu. Im not calling for anybody's head or for boycotting or anything like that at all. I still love MECA and have nothing but respect for Steve and the R&E boys as they don't have an easy job, Im just lobbying for consistency. The rules have to be consistent throughout the season. In this sport, you cant be changing rules and bumping people up MULTIPLE classes halfway thru the season by finding things in the rules that are LITERALLY NOT IN THERE!


----------



## KP

Until I see pics I cannot make judgement. What if the OEM enclosure had the sub facing down for example (no clue) but the new enclosure has the sub facing towards the fire wall.(again no clue) The enclosure might be in the same area of the car but now the sub is not in same location. And Modified IMHO. (And if you look at the MECA results you see that now hubby and wife are in the same class, hmmm. Wouldn't be fun for me anymore.  )

Not that my opinion means anything one way or the other, I am curious as to why MECA is saying go back to the OEM, change classes, etc. That throws up a red flag that something is very different about the enclosure used and that the speaker location is not the same as OEM.

And I do disagree with mid season rule changes. Not all the facts have been posted here is all I know so far.


----------



## papasin

AcuraTLSQ said:


> (And if you look at the MECA results you see that now hubby and wife are in the same class, hmmm. Wouldn't be fun for me anymore.  )


Really? Really? Thanks for being sensitive to the stress we have been put through and you have absolutely no idea. I'm done, my wife is done. Thanks a lot, really!


----------



## MacLeod

AcuraTLSQ said:


> Until I see pics I cannot make judgement. What if the OEM enclosure had the sub facing down for example (no clue) but the new enclosure has the sub facing towards the fire wall.(again no clue) The enclosure might be in the same area of the car but now the sub is not in same location. And Modified IMHO. (And if you look at the MECA results you see that now hubby and wife are in the same class, hmmm. Wouldn't be fun for me anymore.  )
> 
> Not that my opinion means anything one way or the other, I am curious as to why MECA is saying go back to the OEM, change classes, etc. That throws up a red flag that something is very different about the enclosure used and that the speaker location is not the same as OEM.
> 
> And I do disagree with mid season rule changes. Not all the facts have been posted here is all I know so far.


I hear ya brother. Like I said, my beef isn't with them not wanting a custom enclosure, my beef is that prohibiting a custom enclosure wasn't in the rules but its being ruled on as if it were. That's where the problem is. 

Nobody can blame the R&E guys from missing something in the rule book but then you cant punish competitors that have done nothing wrong because of it either. A competitor building a car according to the Street class rules then being bumped TWO classes because of some "spirit of the rules" **** and bull just aint right. That's the issue here and what has everybody fired up. 

Im on record in this very thread not to mention half a dozen other forums over the years defending MECA tooth and nail so ya know Im not gonna ***** about something if I don't think its valid.


----------



## KP

PM sent.


----------



## Darth SQ

So now the Papasin family is out.
A damn crummy result to all this. :mean:


Bret
PPI-ART COLLECTOR


----------



## darrenforeal

PPI-ART COLLECTOR said:


> So now the Papasin family is out.
> A damn crummy result to all this. :mean:
> 
> 
> Bret
> PPI-ART COLLECTOR


along with a lot of others in CA that will not condone this behavior. Well done MECA. Well done.:thumbsdown:


----------



## papasin

papasin said:


> Really? Really? Thanks for being sensitive to the stress we have been put through and you have absolutely no idea. I'm done, my wife is done. Thanks a lot, really!





AcuraTLSQ said:


> PM sent.


I would like to clarify. We sincerely meant what I wrote in the letter I posted above. It's not entirely my place, but Steve does have other things weighing in and that is why I said what I said. My heartfelt best wishes to him.

My hope is for the benefit of the many others that MECA does do the right thing, but for my wife and myself as a family we do need a break one way or another. When I say above we are done, we are done with this thread. Every time either of us open it, it's just too much.

Finally, this isn't about the Smart or us anymore. For us, what we need is to go back to enjoying each other and our family. When the kids are starting to ask questions about us and if we're ok, we know we need to refocus ourselves. Perhaps we can go back to competition, perhaps not. Only time will tell.

Competing against each other might be actually fun, but, let's be clear, that's not the point.

Thanks,
- Richard


----------



## asota

Factory speaker locations may be trimmed to fit same size replacement speaker (cone area). In no case can more than 1/2” of total diameter be removed. 

There is no need for a rule change.


----------



## RenoAutoSound

What a shame. Richard you are a great competitor and good friend. I respect your decision and hopefully I get a chance to hear the Civic soon.


----------



## Mic10is

IMO the final ruling is correct. Up front sub, regardless of factory option or not should be modified class.
The issue is more about how this was all handled and the process, which I do not agree with and it continues to be a "problem" for MECA.


----------



## BigRed

Mic u are stating an opinion about what should be allowed in street, which is no up front sub. The actual rule does not specify that. The car followed the rules. It's in a factory location. Period

Meca is basing their ruling on what should have been written or exactly like the opinion u have

The ruling is wrong based on the rules that we are supposed to follow

If meca feels that they don't want up front bass in this class, CHANGE the rules next year....simple


----------



## Mic10is

BigRed said:


> Mic u are stating an opinion about what should be allowed in street, which is no up front sub. The actual rule does not specify that. The car followed the rules. It's in a factory location. Period
> 
> Meca is basing their ruling on what should have been written or exactly like the opinion u have
> 
> The ruling is wrong based on the rules that we are supposed to follow
> 
> If meca feels that they don't want up front bass in this class, CHANGE the rules next year....simple


I can state my opinion bc I understand the "spirit" of the rule and the intent of how all the rules were written. rules were written as a progression from Stock to Extreme. Its the one thing I highly recommended be eliminated bc it inferred too much information and required competitors to read more than most will ever do or want to.
My recommendation was that everything is spelled out in black and white, and not to infer anything or assume anything.
We as competitor and judges "know" the rules--but as evidenced on several occasions, the new competitor has only the RuleBook he reads to base his decisions on and when that does not match up, with what he is told, there is conflict

I completely agree with you and how this process has been handled has been far from appropriate or stellar.
The fact that this type of situation continues to occur is also highly disappointing.


----------



## MacLeod

Mic10is said:


> I can state my opinion bc I understand the "spirit" of the rule and the intent of how all the rules were written. rules were written as a progression from Stock to Extreme. Its the one thing I highly recommended be eliminated bc it inferred too much information and required competitors to read more than most will ever do or want to.
> My recommendation was that everything is spelled out in black and white, and not to infer anything or assume anything.
> We as competitor and judges "know" the rules--but as evidenced on several occasions, the new competitor has only the RuleBook he reads to base his decisions on and when that does not match up, with what he is told, there is conflict


That sounds good and all but the ruling was not correct and when the rules say you can have a sub up front as long as it's in the stock location, makes NO mention about having to retain the stock enclosure, then that's how it should be. The "spirit" argument is total crap. If it's not in the rules, it's not in the rules. If it "should've been in the rules" well that's a you problem and you put them in there next year and don't punish competitors that did nothing wrong aside from following the rules thinking they would be consistent. Don't add it halfway thru a season then bump somebody up 2 classes where they're at a big disadvantage now. 

The rules HAVE to be consistent. If it's in there, it's in there. If it's not, it's not. You can't be making rulings based on things that are literally not there. If it's something totally brand new and never before seen then you have to do a little interpretation and from the hip rulings and then the "spirit" gimmick can be used but that's not what this is. Up front subs in stock locations are hardly new and as I understand it, they weren't ripping out the AC to fit this sub or trying to shove a 15 under there. They just built their own enclosure which the rules don't prohibit.


----------



## Mic10is

point of my entire post was that I agree there was a massive failure in terms of The rulebook wording, interpretation of the rules, communication from MECA to the Competitor etc...

I fully agree that the "spirit" of the rules is not sufficient reason to change the rules.

Im just saying I understand how they are written as do many others who have done this for awhile.


----------



## MacLeod

Mic10is said:


> point of my entire post was that I agree there was a massive failure in terms of The rulebook wording, interpretation of the rules, communication from MECA to the Competitor etc...
> 
> I fully agree that the "spirit" of the rules is not sufficient reason to change the rules.
> 
> Im just saying I understand how they are written as do many others who have done this for awhile.


Ok we're on the same page then. Hell must have froze over for all of us to be agreeing like this. We must be missing something.


----------



## MrsPapasin

papasin said:


> I would like to clarify. We sincerely meant what I wrote in the letter I posted above. It's not entirely my place, but Steve does have other things weighing in and that is why I said what I said. My heartfelt best wishes to him.
> 
> My hope is for the benefit of the many others that MECA does do the right thing, but for my wife and myself as a family we do need a break one way or another. When I say above we are done, we are done with this thread. Every time either of us open it, it's just too much.
> 
> Finally, this isn't about the Smart or us anymore. For us, what we need is to go back to enjoying each other and our family. When the kids are starting to ask questions about us and if we're ok, we know we need to refocus ourselves. Perhaps we can go back to competition, perhaps not. Only time will tell.
> 
> Competing against each other might be actually fun, but, let's be clear, that's not the point.
> 
> Thanks,
> - Richard


I would like to reiterate and reinforce some of things Richard said. For us as a family, we need to step away from this because it's more than just our children asking if we are ok. I talked to our son about what has been happening and apologized to him for the stress that he can feel that mom and dad are feeling. He then cried and needed reassurance that things will be ok. How is the ruling correct if this is the effect that it is having on my family? Why are we the ones to suffer for the mistake of what wasn't written in the rules? This is exactly the kind of thing that I want to protect our children from. They should not have to see and feel the ugliness that this situation has brought up. 

For those of you who think the ruling is correct, I would ask you to look at this from our point of view. We went into this with the best of intentions. We followed the rules as written. We were learning a lot. We put forth our best effort and had a lot of passion for the sport. We were having fun. We wanted to share that joy and experience with our children. They were having fun. Then we got hit by all of this and the only ones who are paying for the mistake of what wasn't written is us. What's worse is we put our whole hearted effort into this and involved our children. And now our entire family is paying for a mistake which wasn't our fault.


----------



## Mic10is

MrsPapasin said:


> I would like to reiterate and reinforce some of things Richard said. For us as a family, we need to step away from this because it's more than just our children asking if we are ok. I talked to our son about what has been happening and apologized to him for the stress that he can feel that mom and dad are feeling. He then cried and needed reassurance that things will be ok. How is the ruling correct if this is the effect that it is having on my family? Why are we the ones to suffer for the mistake of what wasn't written in the rules? This is exactly the kind of thing that I want to protect our children from. They should not have to see and feel the ugliness that this situation has brought up.
> 
> For those of you who think the ruling is correct, I would ask you to look at this from our point of view. We went into this with the best of intentions. We followed the rules as written. We were learning a lot. We put forth our best effort and had a lot of passion for the sport. We were having fun. We wanted to share that joy and experience with our children. They were having fun. Then we got hit by all of this and the only ones who are paying for the mistake of what wasn't written is us. What's worse is we put our whole hearted effort into this and involved our children. And now our entire family is paying for a mistake which wasn't our fault.


Its rare for this sort of situation to happen in SQ, altho it has been happening more and more in MECA bc of increased participation across the board.
It actually is quite common for this sort of thing to happen in SPL. 
It is nearly impossible to write a set of rules that cover all situations, all vehicles etc...
Rules Committees do their best to write a set of rules based on the best information they have available to them at the time.
Unfortunately, this often leaves some grey areas as things change or people try new things to push the envelope and the limits of what people think is capable.

It is rare for a vehicle to have a front mounted dedicated subwoofer.
Having been a MECA judge for a few years, I know the INTENT of the class structure was to not allow front mounted subwoofers in classes below Modified. Why Noone ever just plain spelled that out is beyond me.
Its really quite simple, just put in the rules that no front mounted subwoofers in classes before Modified.


Believe me I can empathize with your situation. I had a teammate who installed a Car-Pc as a source, competed with it enough to qualify for finals. So it was judged by at least 4 other certified MECA judges when he had the Car-Pc installed. It was *verified AT finals* with the Car-PC installed. It was then judged by 2 of 3 judges at FINALS with the car-Pc installed. the Final SQ judge, decided that it was best to use his time to do verification instead of judging SQ, and decided that this was against the rules. My friend was disqualified. .....but then MECA agreed to allow him to compete and be rejudged by the 3rd judge if he could find a new source in less than 12hrs and retune.
so after a quick scramble and very very thoughtful and helpful teammates, we was able to wire in a new head unit, I did a quick re-tune and he was able to be rejudged-but it sounded nothing like it did using his original source.
The ordeal was enough for my friend to walk away from competition after finals, which I totally understand.

Another Teammate had a similar situation a couple years ago--Dash Mats were not commercially for his particular vehicle. So I cut a piece of carpet that contoured to the exact shape of the dash, vent cut outs etc....
2 judges went thru at Finals...3rd judge said he couldnt use it bc it was a "Custom" dash mat.
Had to recheck all his settings and tweak some things without the dash mat....
He ended up winning his class, but regardless---

It Happens


----------



## papasin

Mic10is said:


> Its rare for this sort of situation to happen in SQ, altho it has been happening more and more in MECA bc of increased participation across the board.
> It actually is quite common for this sort of thing to happen in SPL.
> It is nearly impossible to write a set of rules that cover all situations, all vehicles etc...
> Rules Committees do their best to write a set of rules based on the best information they have available to them at the time.
> Unfortunately, this often leaves some grey areas as things change or people try new things to push the envelope and the limits of what people think is capable.
> 
> It is rare for a vehicle to have a front mounted dedicated subwoofer.
> Having been a MECA judge for a few years, I know the INTENT of the class structure was to not allow front mounted subwoofers in classes below Modified. Why Noone ever just plain spelled that out is beyond me.
> Its really quite simple, just put in the rules that no front mounted subwoofers in classes before Modified.
> 
> 
> Believe me I can empathize with your situation. I had a teammate who installed a Car-Pc as a source, competed with it enough to qualify for finals. So it was judged by at least 4 other certified MECA judges when he had the Car-Pc installed. It was *verified AT finals* with the Car-PC installed. It was then judged by 2 of 3 judges at FINALS with the car-Pc installed. the Final SQ judge, decided that it was best to use his time to do verification instead of judging SQ, and decided that this was against the rules. My friend was disqualified. .....but then MECA agreed to allow him to compete and be rejudged by the 3rd judge if he could find a new source in less than 12hrs and retune.
> so after a quick scramble and very very thoughtful and helpful teammates, we was able to wire in a new head unit, I did a quick re-tune and he was able to be rejudged-but it sounded nothing like it did using his original source.
> The ordeal was enough for my friend to walk away from competition after finals, which I totally understand.
> 
> Another Teammate had a similar situation a couple years ago--Dash Mats were not commercially for his particular vehicle. So I cut a piece of carpet that contoured to the exact shape of the dash, vent cut outs etc....
> 2 judges went thru at Finals...3rd judge said he couldnt use it bc it was a "Custom" dash mat.
> Had to recheck all his settings and tweak some things without the dash mat....
> He ended up winning his class, but regardless---
> 
> It Happens


While this is my first year "officially" competing, I have been around a little and familiar with your examples mic. Unfortunately, you are comparing apples and oranges.

With req, which I really feel for as I read when that happened, the CarPC situation was not allowed in the rulebook in his class.

Your other example also is specifically called out in the rulebook.

The point (which I'm hoping people fully understand) is that what we are being called on is something that is allowed in the rules, and what is being ruled on is *not* in the rules and how the rules should have been written.

I fully get the latter. But if that's the intent, let's please make sure to put it in the rulebook next year, and if I'm up to it, I'll come up with something  (in either a different class or redesign for a rear sub). But let's please keep things objective and compare apples to apples.

Thanks,
- Richard

P.S. Since someone told me my wife posted, I guess I had to check. Now, I really need to try to get back to my real work .


----------



## Mic10is

I think both situation are pretty similar. Situations were allowed by MECA, the Car-Pc wasnt in the rules in Mod-Street specifically , in fact it made no mention of it. It made no mention of a car-pc until you got to modified. So it wasnt even in the rules to disallow it. 

so in any matter, the situation was originally allowed by MECA judges, event coordinators and it wasnt until a random occurrence did a different interpretation of the rules occur. 

fortunately for you guys, at least this didnt happen AT FINALS!.


----------



## papasin

Guys and gals, I just came up with a wild but possible resolution. I want to throw it out to the peanut gallery, and then email MECA (and I assume R&E can decide). I propose a mid-season rule change per Mic's opinion so that it is clear to everyone, then get it in the rules as of (dunno), tomorrow.

*ALL *up front subs are banned in stock, street, and mod street, stock enclosure or otherwise. We will comply, but so should everyone. Everyone keeps their points. Thoughts?

P.S. I'm trying to do the right thing here...


----------



## Mic10is

papasin said:


> Guys and gals, I just came up with a wild but possible resolution. I want to throw it out to the peanut gallery, and then email MECA (and I assume R&E can decide). I propose a mid-season rule change per Mic's opinion so that it is clear to everyone, then get it in the rules as of (dunno), tomorrow.
> 
> *ALL *up front subs are banned in stock, street, and mod street, stock enclosure or otherwise. We will comply, but so should everyone. Everyone keeps their points. Thoughts?
> 
> P.S. I'm trying to do the right thing here...


I like Black and White. That was my suggestion from the Start. YOU can do this, YOU Cant do this.
If it isnt listed, You cant do it--and we will address it next season.

As of a few months ago, I am on sabbatical from active competition to focus on home remodel and possible relocation to NC-but Im still active in an advisory role as part of the IASCA Rules Committee and some show scheduling.

But I see no qualms with mid season addendum to rules to fill in any gaps or grey areas that may have been missed in the 1st 10 revisions of the current rules.


----------



## papasin

Mic10is said:


> I like Black and White. That was my suggestion from the Start. YOU can do this, YOU Cant do this.
> If it isnt listed, You cant do it--and we will address it next season.
> 
> As of a few months ago, I am on sabbatical from active competition to focus on home remodel and possible relocation to NC-but Im still active in an advisory role as part of the IASCA Rules Committee and some show scheduling.
> 
> But I see no qualms with mid season addendum to rules to fill in any gaps or grey areas that may have been missed in the 1st 10 revisions of the current rules.


Thanks. Anyone else? I'll send an email to Steve, Kimo, etc. by 5pm PST unless someone has an issue with this.


----------



## Melodic Acoustic

Wow just wow!!! 

But Richard you are the man to even go out your way to agree to this and to try to comply. My hats off to you sir. 

Tend to your family sir. At the end of the day that is what is important.

But what you purpose makes it cut and try.


----------



## MrsPapasin

papasin said:


> Guys and gals, I just came up with a wild but possible resolution. I want to throw it out to the peanut gallery, and then email MECA (and I assume R&E can decide). I propose a mid-season rule change per Mic's opinion so that it is clear to everyone, then get it in the rules as of (dunno), tomorrow.
> 
> *ALL *up front subs are banned in stock, street, and mod street, stock enclosure or otherwise. We will comply, but so should everyone. Everyone keeps their points. Thoughts?
> 
> P.S. I'm trying to do the right thing here...


The Mrs. seconds as it does not make us feel like we are being singled out and the rules will be written as was intended. We can then tell our children that is what the rules say now (though MECA should not make this a habit of changing the rules in the middle of the year). It is fair to treat everyone the same.

I still would like MECA to recognize that this situation was handled VERY poorly. MECA needs to comply with their own rules and protocol if they want the rest of us to be in compliance. A formal protest was never filed for our case (read page 3 for the protest process). A formal protest should be filed otherwise R&E cannot make a ruling in the first place because they wouldn't have had all the facts. Second, it's been a month since this protest came up. We have been dragged through unnecessary duress over an extended period of time. Rules state that R&E has 48 hours to respond to the complaint. Last, review your procedures in how you want to make an official statement on a ruling. We were given an email from the MECA CA event director with Steve Stern cc'd on it and then were told later that there was no record of it and that it was not an official ruling. If the official ruling is an email directly from Steve Stern then say so in your rules. Otherwise how are any of us to believe when we've been given a final ruling?

And finally everyone who has competed with an up front sub in stock, street, or mod street get to keep all of their points and stay in their class because this wasn't anyone's fault that the rules did not read as they should.

If all of that is followed then I am ok with this.


----------



## asota

Factory speaker locations may be trimmed to fit same size replacement speaker (cone area). In no case can more than 1/2” of total diameter be removed. 

Again this is strait from rules for street class there is no need for a rule change if this rule in black and white was followed there would be no need for discussion. But a mid-season change to no subs up front in those 3 class's is a option.


----------



## MacLeod

asota said:


> Factory speaker locations may be trimmed to fit same size replacement speaker (cone area). In no case can more than 1/2” of total diameter be removed.
> 
> Again this is strait from rules for street class there is no need for a rule change if this rule in black and white was followed there would be no need for discussion. But a mid-season change to no subs up front in those 3 class's is a option.


That's talking about door speakers. We're talking about putting a sub in the factory location in the dash. This is allowed in the rules. The rules said it had to be in the stock location and said nothing about having to use the stock enclosure. They are being penalized for having a custom enclosure even tho there is NO mention of it in the rule books. 

MECA's response was that "it should've been in there" but it wasn't. You can't penalize a competitor for doing something that is NOT in the rule book.


----------



## decibelle

Mic10is said:


> I like Black and White. That was my suggestion from the Start. YOU can do this, YOU Cant do this.
> *If it isnt listed, You cant do it--and we will address it next season.*


Unfortunately we all tend to assume the opposite when building our cars. "Well nothing says I _can't..._"

No rulebook can please everyone, that's why there's an R&E committee - made of thinking and rational people - to address the gray areas that are inevitable because of all the thousands of different types of cars that exist. It's just the thinking and rational part that needs a bit more exercise, IMHO.

You can write as many rules as you want, but it'll never cover everything. That's why we need a R&E (and judges) made of solid character.


----------



## Mic10is

millerlyte said:


> Unfortunately we all tend to assume the opposite when building our cars. "Well nothing says I _can't..._"
> 
> No rulebook can please everyone, that's why there's an R&E committee - made of thinking and rational people - to address the gray areas that are inevitable because of all the thousands of different types of cars that exist. It's just the thinking and rational part that needs a bit more exercise, IMHO.
> 
> You can write as many rules as you want, but it'll never cover everything. That's why we need a R&E (and judges) made of solid character.


thats why I specifically stated that "if it isnt in the rules, the answer is NO"


----------



## asota

MacLeod said:


> That's talking about door speakers. We're talking about putting a sub in the factory location in the dash. This is allowed in the rules. The rules said it had to be in the stock location and said nothing about having to use the stock enclosure. They are being penalized for having a custom enclosure even tho there is NO mention of it in the rule books.
> 
> MECA's response was that "it should've been in there" but it wasn't. You can't penalize a competitor for doing something that is NOT in the rule book.


That rule is for door speakers dash speakers and under dash speakers (old Toyotas had under dash speakers) If that rule had been followed there would be no points taken away, no hard feelings, and no further discussion.


----------



## papasin

asota said:


> That rule is for door speakers dash speakers and under dash speakers (old Toyotas had under dash speakers) If that rule had been followed there would be no points taken away, no hard feelings, and no further discussion.


Straight from the rulebook with respect to subwoofer placement and installation under "Requirements":

"Unless mounted in a factory location, subwoofer(s) must be installed in the trunk/cargo area."

asota, I believe what you are referring to is in the "Permitted" section this rule:

"Factory speaker locations may be trimmed to fit same
size replacement speaker (cone area). In no case can
more than 1/2” of total diameter be removed."

What the Smart and the discussion wrt subwoofers is the former and not the latter.

Proposed wording from what I've mentioned a few posts up:

Requirements replacement in Stock and street:
Subwoofer(s) must be installed in the trunk/cargo area (no exceptions).

Requirements replacement in Mod street:
Subwoofer(s) must be installed behind the B-pillars (no exceptions).

Thoughts?


----------



## slade1274

For the record, I am against how this whole thing was handled- but to take a literal alternative perspective.....

Subwoofer is an ambiguous term- it could mean just the transducer/driver component or the system inclusive of the enclosure. To lean to what Kirk was implying, if you take the former definition, it implies the necessity of the factory enclosure as that would be required to mount the driver in the stock location- as the stock subwoofer is mounted to the stock subwoofer enclosure.

Just another perspective that if had been positioned properly in a timely manner may have been easier to swallow.


----------



## asota

"Unless mounted in a factory location, subwoofer(s) must be installed in the trunk/cargo area."
Again even by this rule if the sub was mounted in the factory location there would be no controversy. The sub was mounted in a custom box not the factory mounting location. I honestly do not see any grey area in the current rules on this subject. Not to say there aren't grey areas in the rules.


----------



## Mic10is

what about BMW with under seat subwoofers in front?


----------



## papasin

Mic10is said:


> what about BMW with under seat subwoofers in front?


So I'm confused. In post #476, you stated:

"Up front sub, regardless of factory option or not should be modified class."

So I'm struggling here because I'm trying to give a solution that makes it so that as you pointed out is black and white and that's what you said would be best. So per your own recommendation, then yeah, that should not be allowed. Why let a factory location install on the BMW be allowed, and not a Smart?


----------



## BigRed

asota said:


> "Unless mounted in a factory location, subwoofer(s) must be installed in the trunk/cargo area."
> Again even by this rule if the sub was mounted in the factory location there would be no controversy. The sub was mounted in a custom box not the factory mounting location. I honestly do not see any grey area in the current rules on this subject. Not to say there aren't grey areas in the rules.


it was mounted in the "factory location" using the factory brackets. You are confusing factory enclosure with location. why?


----------



## chefhow

Richard, I think it should be written as no subwoofers factory or not can be mounted infront of the B Pillars in any class before Modified.


----------



## papasin

chefhow said:


> Richard, I think it should be written as no subwoofers factory or not can be mounted infront of the B Pillars in any class before Modified.


Thanks for the input Howard. My rationale for the way I split up stock/street vs. mod street is I was patterning based on the current rules.

Stock/street says trunk cargo area. Mod street is behind b-pillars.

I have no beef of combining all 3, but the former gives the natural progression as mentioned. Can I get spirit points for this?


----------



## Mic10is

papasin said:


> Thanks for the input Howard. My rationale for the way I split up stock/street vs. mod street is I was patterning based on the current rules.
> 
> Stock/street says trunk cargo area. Mod street is behind b-pillars.
> 
> I have no beef of combining all 3, but the former gives the natural progression as mentioned. Can I get spirit points for this?


spirit points are always inferred but can be rescinded upon protest by another member and review by the spirit committee.


----------



## BigRed

Lol @ mic


----------



## MacLeod

I don't think they should ban up front subs in the lower classes if your car came with one stock. All they have to do is stipulate it better in the rules.

For example: You can use an aftermarket sub in Stock-ModStreet ONLY IF its in the stock location and the same size as stock. You CAN build a custom enclosure ONLY IF it fits where the stock enclosure was. Nothing can be moved around or cut out in order to make room for it. You can even limit it to only being a sealed box. I see nothing wrong with that at all. Whats the difference in that and me making a 3/4" MDF baffle and slapping 4 layers of Dynamat on my door panels? Im doing that to make my door speakers "enclosure" sturdier and more rigid. Building a custom enclosure for your sub is the same thing. 

So your car comes with a 8 in the dash, you take it out and replace it with a JL Audio 8 and build a box the same size and shape as the OEM one just a whole lot sturdier and it drops right in. I see no reason not to permit that and think its totally in the "spirit" (  ) of Stock, Street and ModStreet.


----------



## papasin

MacLeod said:


> I don't think they should ban up front subs in the lower classes if your car came with one stock. All they have to do is stipulate it better in the rules.
> 
> For example: You can use an aftermarket sub in Stock-ModStreet ONLY IF its in the stock location and the same size as stock. You CAN build a custom enclosure ONLY IF it fits where the stock enclosure was. Nothing can be moved around or cut out in order to make room for it. You can even limit it to only being a sealed box. I see nothing wrong with that at all. Whats the difference in that and me making a 3/4" MDF baffle and slapping 4 layers of Dynamat on my door panels? Im doing that to make my door speakers "enclosure" sturdier and more rigid. Building a custom enclosure for your sub is the same thing.
> 
> So your car comes with a 8 in the dash, you take it out and replace it with a JL Audio 8 and build a box the same size and shape as the OEM one just a whole lot sturdier and it drops right in. I see no reason not to permit that and think its totally in the "spirit" (  ) of Stock, Street and ModStreet.


Aaron, this is good input and I am not arguing. You've basically argued the current install in the Smart. It is utilizing ALL factory mounting points. I didn't have to drill any holes, nadda. Literally a bolt on.

So this is the dilemma I think for R&E to ponder. Since the last ruling was we aren't allowed to do this, then if they apply Mic's rationale and make it black and white, then dis-allow to everyone equally. I don't think you can have one and not the other. So either allow up front sub in factory location, or don't, and do it across the board.


----------



## Matt R

Man, it seems a little late for me to jump in here but I will anyways.

For starters, It seems this has gotten blown completely out of porportion. For a hobby, this is supposed to be more about having fun and sharing a good time with like minded friends.

I've read alot of good and bad comments about MECA and the R&E committe. Looks like more bad here on this thread. It's really a shame that when we wright the rules we can't forsee every posible situation. If we could there would be no misunderstandings at all. 

Being on the R&E committe I can tell you we are discussing this situation now. My prior knowledge of this smart car is that the car in question did not come with a sub. It was an option in a particular model of the smart car. Please correct me if this is wronge info. 

If this particular car had a front mounted subwoofer, the next problem is the factory location (where the sub was located or mounted) of the subwoofer was mounted in a factory enclosure. Completely replacing that enclosure is way beyond the allowed "trimming a maximum 1/2" of material".

I understand that the rules can be interpreted in many different ways. The intention of the R&E committe is to do our best to make a level playing field for the different competition classes.

It's amazing to me that so many of you are getting upset about this. Not to make light of a bad situation but this is just a simple misunderstanding of the rules and the intention of them. 

All that being said, I didn't see or hear any of the original discussions between you and the event director or Steve Stern. I really cant comment on how this situation was handled by anyone, MECA or the competitors involved. 

I am sorry to hear this has gotten to the point where feelings are hurt and people are discouraged enough to quit competing. 

Matt


----------



## papasin

Matt R said:


> Man, it seems a little late for me to jump in here but I will anyways.
> 
> For starters, It seems this has gotten blown completely out of porportion. For a hobby, this is supposed to be more about having fun and sharing a good time with like minded friends.
> 
> I've read alot of good and bad comments about MECA and the R&E committe. Looks like more bad here on this thread. It's really a shame that when we wright the rules we can't forsee every posible situation. If we could there would be no misunderstandings at all.
> 
> Being on the R&E committe I can tell you we are discussing this situation now. My prior knowledge of this smart car is that the car in question did not come with a sub. It was an option in a particular model of the smart car. Please correct me if this is wronge info.
> 
> If this particular car had a front mounted subwoofer, the next problem is the factory location (where the sub was located or mounted) of the subwoofer was mounted in a factory enclosure. Completely replacing that enclosure is way beyond the allowed "trimming a maximum 1/2" of material".
> 
> I understand that the rules can be interpreted in many different ways. The intention of the R&E committe is to do our best to make a level playing field for the different competition classes.
> 
> It's amazing to me that so many of you are getting upset about this. Not to make light of a bad situation but this is just a simple misunderstanding of the rules and the intention of them.
> 
> All that being said, I didn't see or hear any of the original discussions between you and the event director or Steve Stern. I really cant comment on how this situation was handled by anyone, MECA or the competitors involved.
> 
> I am sorry to hear this has gotten to the point where feelings are hurt and people are discouraged enough to quit competing.
> 
> Matt


Post #435 and #464 has the exchanges.


----------



## Matt R

papasin said:


> Post #435 and #464 has the exchanges.


Did YOUR car come with a front mounted sub?


----------



## papasin

Matt R said:


> Did YOUR car come with a front mounted sub?


Sorry, doing two things at once. I'm talking to Vinny right now. Please standby. We're close.


----------



## Mic10is

papasin said:


> So I'm confused. In post #476, you stated:
> 
> "Up front sub, regardless of factory option or not should be modified class."
> 
> So I'm struggling here because I'm trying to give a solution that makes it so that as you pointed out is black and white and that's what you said would be best. So per your own recommendation, then yeah, that should not be allowed. Why let a factory location install on the BMW be allowed, and not a Smart?


Im just throwing out the only other vehicle I know that has a front mounted dedicated subwoofer.

what I stated earlier is the Intent of the MECA classifications that subwoofers are not permitted to be mounted in front of the Bpillar in classes below modified.

So by "figuring" out all the possible vehicle or at least showing that there are more than one vehicle affected by a particular rule, it gives more credence to amending a rule.

IASCA had a similar situation arise earlier this year.
I cant find the specifics, but since IASCA is an International organization, one of the affiliate countries had questions about a particular SPL rule or classification. I think it had to do with Hatchbacks.
the Honda CRX was available as a 4 seater in some countries. So IASCA and its affiliates had to find all similar vehicles that have another option as available and re-word the class and rules for the classes affected.
I dont pay much attention to SPL, but it was a huge deal for awhile bc a bunch of people screamed that having such a vehicle if it wasnt under the same rules as the others was considered cheating or manipulating the rules etc...

It would be similar is a sense to finding a vehicle that comes stock with Kick panels and a front mounted subwoofer and buying it solely to compete in STOCK Class. Nothing in the rules prohibit doing this, its just one of those things that people dont do bc its suppose to be about enjoying audio and friends, not purely about winning by maxing out the rules.

Im not here to take sides with anyone. Just stating the reasoning behind why the rule is in place and how best to possibly deal with the situation for an amicable solution for all.


----------



## Matt R

That is a yes or no question. You could have answered with 15 less words.

Not trying to be a jerk, thats just some important info.


----------



## papasin

Matt R said:


> That is a yes or no question. You could have answered with 15 less words.
> 
> Not trying to be a jerk, thats just some important info.


no. we bought a prefab enclosure to mount in the factory mounting points in the factory location. anyway, vinny already provided a clear explanation. one unfortunately we did not get when this whole thing started. i will post, and everyone can see the exchange, and it makes sense. really, this didn't have to get here as well if this was received right away. as for being a jerk, no, but i guess i have to also ask how come nobody has chimed in until now?


----------



## strakele

The fact that the rules reference drivers using different words (tweeter, speaker, subwoofer) implies that they are considering those types specifically, and that said rule does not apply to other types of drivers. 

For example:

A rule referencing "tweeters" does not apply to "speakers" or "subwoofers." (rules talking about tweeter location/size, etc)

A rule referencing "speakers" does not apply to "tweeters" or "subwoofers." (rules talking about cutting 1/2" of material to fit an aftermarket one)

A rule referencing "subwoofers" does not apply to "tweeters" or "speakers." (rules regarding placement in the vehicle)

"Tweeters" in the rules are defined as 2" or less.
"Speakers" in the rules at least for the lower classes are defined as 6.5" or less (when talking about adding speakers to kicks) and otherwise assumed to be any driver that isn't a tweeter or subwoofer
"Subwoofers" in the rules are not defined by size. 

So in the rules, what makes the sub a sub? Is it being bigger than 6.5 inches? Doubtful. Is it the fact that it's in an enclosure? Other speakers can be too... and what about IB? Is it the frequencies they play? If so, what's the cutoff for it to be deemed a subwoofer? Is it what the manufacturer calls it?

Say someone has a car like an Infinity G35 or BMW that has 8's or 10's in the doors or under the seat from the factory and wants to compete in mod street or something. They stick some allowed 6.5's in the kicks, put a tweeter in the pillar, and an 8 or 10 in the factory seat/door location with no high-pass. Is that a rule-breaking sub in front of the B-pillar? Since it seems the 'intent' of the rules is no front sub below modified, but this is clearly using factory locations with no modification of the factory locations.


----------



## Matt R

papasin said:


> no. we bought a prefab enclosure to mount in the factory mounting points in the factory location. anyway, vinny already provided a clear explanation. one unfortunately we did not get when this whole thing started. i will post, and everyone can see the exchange, and it makes sense. really, this didn't have to get here as well if this was received right away. as for being a jerk, no, but i guess i have to also ask how come nobody has chimed in until now?


The integrity of MECA was slammed by you and several other people for multiple pages on this forum. To me, that's what is wrong. 

When this subject was brought to the committe originally, we knew your car didnt come with the sub option from the factory. That was my first question to Vinny when we talked about this car. It's automatically a no for any class below Modified for that reason alone. 

Why didnt you get this attention til now is because we thought it was a clear cut case of, there was no sub from the factory to start with.

Maybe Steve Stern didnt relay the outcome of our decision as well as possible but thats no excuse for the bashing MECA has recieved here.


----------



## papasin

Matt R said:


> The integrity of MECA was slammed by you and several other people for multiple pages on this forum. To me, that's what is wrong.
> 
> When this subject was brought to the committe originally, we knew your car didnt come with the sub option from the factory. That was my first question to Vinny when we talked about this car. It's automatically a no for any class below Modified for that reason alone.
> 
> Why didnt you get this attention til now is because we thought it was a clear cut case of, there was no sub from the factory to start with.
> 
> Maybe Steve Stern didnt relay the outcome of our decision as well as possible but thats no excuse for the bashing MECA has recieved here.


I'm sorry, but when did I blast MECA?

EDIT: Please find A single post where I did so.


----------



## decibelle

papasin said:


> no. we bought a prefab enclosure to mount in the factory mounting points in the factory location.


So, let me get this straight: in the location for the _factory option_ of the front sub, there are still mounting locations explicitly for the addition of one if you had ordered it, otherwise serving _no other purpose_? So when you order the option, you simply get the sub and box, and the mounting bolts and whatnot are already there regardless?

That clarifies it a little better imho. Now I see how they arrived at the rationale behind the ruling... but I still can't get on board with it.


----------



## Mic10is

so wait.......the car in question didnt actually come from the factory with the optional front mounted sub enclosure? 
Rather it was an available option, but factory enclosure was not used. a custom sub enclosure was built to house an aftermarket sub, but it was mounted using the factory mounting points....

I am now equally confused as to how this was escalated to this point bc it is pretty clear cut to me. regardless of location, its a custom subwoofer enclosure mounted in the front of the car.
That is not allowed below modified.

I think many people responding to this thread in disappointment with MECA were under the impression that the car WAS purchased with the factory sub enclosure option and only the sub was replaced.

Its a small but important detail IMO that the vehicle in question didnt come that way stock.


----------



## papasin

millerlyte said:


> So when you order the option, you simply get the sub and box, and the mounting bolts and whatnot are already there regardless?


Correct, I did not drill or add anything.


----------



## Matt R

Mic10is said:


> so wait.......the car in question didnt actually come from the factory with the optional front mounted sub enclosure?
> Rather it was an available option, but factory enclosure was not used. a custom sub enclosure was built to house an aftermarket sub, but it was mounted using the factory mounting points....
> 
> I am now equally confused as to how this was escalated to this point bc it is pretty clear cut to me. regardless of location, its a custom subwoofer enclosure mounted in the front of the car.
> That is not allowed below modified.
> 
> I think many people responding to this thread in disappointment with MECA were under the impression that the car WAS purchased with the factory sub enclosure option and only the sub was replaced.
> 
> Its a small but important detail IMO that the vehicle in question didnt come that way stock.


Ding ding ding!!!!


----------



## Matt R

Here are just a few of the negative comments that have transpired from this discussion. Like I said, I'm not trying to be a jerk but MECA has been dragged through the mud on this forum.



MrsPapasin said:


> Thank you everyone for the overwhelming support. Unfortunately, we feel MECA has not responded in an acceptable manner.
> 
> we cannot in good conscience teach our children that what is written in a rulebook is actually not the rules, but that the rules are left up to those who interpret them whatever way they choose to see fit.
> 
> But to make the competitor pay for how the rules are written and to reinterpret the rules along the way is unethical.
> 
> We are deeply disappointed with the MECA organization's response. We feel that the integrity of the MECA organization and the "spirit" of the car audio sport has been tarnished.
> 
> 
> 
> MrsPapasin said:
> 
> 
> 
> Bret,
> 
> I think you missed the point. I can't teach my children that it's ok to have one set of rules written up and then have another completely made up one that overrides what's written. That's like telling my children that's it's ok to play a game with their friends and then change the rules along the way.
> 
> EDIT: Nor do I think it kosher to tell someone one thing and then retract it. CA event director with Steve cc'd should be official enough. So saying that he had no record of it is null and void.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> millerlyte said:
> 
> 
> 
> Wow, come on MECA, get your **** together. The way this is going, is only a matter of time until more people are affected by the rules inconsistencies than people who are not. This is no way to promote MECA nor sportsmanship. In my short time competing I've seen far too many people drop out of competition for the same stupid reason. I think its safe to say that most of us compete in large part because we enjoy the friendly competition amongst our buddies, and when they're no longer there anymore because of asinine stuff like this, the hobby loses its primary representatives - us.
> 
> MECA conduct needs to change or there won't be any MECA in a few short years.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BigRed said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm even more blow away that stearn himself cannot admit fault in the ruling of the smart car. Its absolutely clear to everybody else but him.
> 
> Hey Meca, you're about to lose all of the california competition for next year because you are clearly displaying no integrity in your own rules. I find it even more odd that NOBODY from R&E is responding here, but they were quick to defend when Erin, Richard, and others pointed out that MECA wanted to change the rules AFTER they came out, and it did'nt sit well with others.
> 
> Grow some balls and explain to us right here why this make sense R&E.
> 
> This is wrong wrong wrong.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


----------



## papasin

Here is the email I just received:

"My name is Vinny Taylor. I work with MECA in the SQ format. I was asked to look into your issue with classing your car to compete in SQ. I am very sorry that this has become so serious to upset your family. I feel we try to provide a fun relaxing environment at our shows. We have tried to create classes where there are cars competing against each other with similar system design. We were the first organization to try this. We were using this format in our SPL program with great success. Not to say we did not have issues like this one where there is some grey in the rules. That is where the "spirit of the class" saying came from. Our rules for stock and street last year stated you use the factory enclosure. We meant the same thing this year. The Subwoofer is a speaker. If you want to upgrade it. You remove it from the factory enclosure and replace it with another speaker. The factory subwoofer enclosre is the factory location. All the other rules apply, you can not change the size of the speaker you may only trim to make sure that same size speaker fits in the opening. The subwoofer is just another speaker not an enclosure. I think your enclosure is a after market enclosure not the factory enclosure. That is why someone asked if it was legal in Street."

We would like to thank Vinny for providing this explanation. We are glad that finally he has explained why there is issue with our upfront sub and we appreciate that. We truly do.

For us, the thing that gets to us the most isn't about the whole sub rule. What we are most upset about is the process. The informal protest happened on April 28. The proper procedures of filing a written protest was not taken. Even so, we did exactly what we were asked to obtain schematics, etc., and then we got a response from the MECA CA Event Director that had [email protected] cc'd. We even took the time to thank Steve and Kimo for their time and decision. There were plenty of opportunities for whoever is on the receiving end of these emails to refute the matter. No one stepped up so we assumed that was ok. Please refer to the attachment on post #435 and see that we did receive an email from Kimo with [email protected] cc'd. We're really baffled why none of you seem to acknowledge that. It's there in plain text for all to see. That was May 8. Then on May 24 we got a phone call saying that the Smart car was reclassified to modified and that it was in the violation of the spirit of the subwoofer rule. We never got an official written response of this until we had written that first letter. In this there was no explanation of the real reason why this decision had been reached other than that the rule is supposed to read "Unless mounted to a factory location and in the factory enclosure, subwoofer(s) must be installed in the trunk/cargo area."
Today is May 27. Had someone given the proper explanation of why it was wrong in the first place then all if this could have been spared. Had this been handled properly by MECA's very own rules none of this would have escalated to this point. The rules state that first a formal written protest has to be made detailing the issues and then R&E has 48 hours to respond to the complaint. We don't understand how 48 hours translates to one month as being acceptable. Or that it's ok to just give us non descript explanations of why it was ruled the way it was. When you do that then of course people are going to jump to the worst of conclusions. In future it would be wise to follow the protocol as spelled out in the MECA rules to avoid unnecessary duress. Respond within the 48 hour period. Take the time to explain why something is ruled a certain way especially for us first timers. We accept the ruling with this explanation. Unlike it may seem we are very reasonable people when you just take the time to do things right. We are ok with being called out wrong if we really are.

I did send out the suggestion of no up front subs, but instead, the response I received is the one above.

I'd suggest updating the rules to read like last year to prevent any further confusion. Thanks.


----------



## papasin

Matt R said:


> Here are just a few of the negative comments that have transpired from this discussion. Like I said, I'm not trying to be a jerk but MECA has been dragged through the mud on this forum.


Matt, you are putting words in my mouth. Also, can you explain why you or nobody else from R&E said anything sooner?


----------



## Matt R

These questions were not answered 3 to 4 days ago and 4 pages back.



tnaudio said:


> Is your sub not in the factory encloser? I can kinda see this if it is not. Much like you can't build a speaker encloser in the door for your speakers in this class. You can only use the car as it is pretty much.





bikinpunk said:


> did your car actually come with an 8" sub and you replaced it with an aftermarket, or did you get a model without the sub and then add the OEM parts to add the sub?
> 
> I'm just curious of the details here.


----------



## papasin

Matt R said:


> These questions were not answered 3 to 4 days ago and 4 pages back.


Matt, please see my post #523 above.

Thanks,
- Richard


----------



## Matt R

Matt R;1896162
Why didnt you get this attention til now is because we thought it was a clear cut case of said:


> I'm quoting myself to answer the same question you asked a few posts back


----------



## Matt R

Yeah man, 4 days later. Come on, why didnt you answer the question 4 days ago


----------



## BigAl205

Matt R said:


> Yeah man, 4 days later. Come on, why didnt you answer the question 4 days ago


Why didn't you chime in 4 days ago?


----------



## Matt R

I havent been on this forum in a several weeks. 

I have a family, run a business and dont always have time to post till 2:30am like i'm doing tonight.

The R&E committe reviewed this several weeks ago and didnt find the need to go too much deeper when we found out the sub wasnt in the vehicle from the factory.


----------



## darrenforeal

yikes, this has turned into more of a mess. Good luck to all. Sorry to see so many hard feelings on every side of the fence. These last few pages have shed more light on things. I just don't understand why it was okay'd in writing, and then only to be taken back when there was a protest. One of which that wasn't even done correctly. 



Mic10is said:


> what about BMW with under seat subwoofers in front?


aren't those mid basses?


----------



## TOOSTUBBORN2FAIL

I would love to see an answer to stakele's post. Since meca uses different terms and rules for speakers vs subwoofers, how is one to infer the rules from one apply to the other.

Also, let me ask this question. Lets say i bought a dodge neon acr, which came from the factory with no stereo and no deadening, because its the car i could afford. Now lets say i put the stock dodge system in, completely stock, in stock locations. By your logic used above, i would not be allowed to compete bellow modified with a dead stock system, because my car didnt roll off the line with it installed, even though it was an option. Is that how meca plays?


----------



## Melodic Acoustic

I simply can not believe this has/is still going on. I'm just floored it just keeping worst. 

What has been said has been said what has been done has been done, now it simply time to come to a resolution. To keep going around and around about this is not helping nor fixing the issue at hand. Thing is some people is going in on the butt end of this whole thing and lighting the fire again. 

A resolution was purposed that will make the rules cut and dry

*"No upfront subs or any kind from Stock to Modified Street, of any kind."* If it is classified as a sub, it can not be in front of the B-Pillars. If your car comes with 8 or 10 inch drivers in the doors, dash, under the seats anywhere forward of the B-Pillars and if you replace them it has to be a mid-bass classified driver. If you choose to run it with out a high-pass that is your choice. I can't see it being an advantage to do so. Some have tried this and it worked, but not to the level they have hoped.

So please for the sake of MECA and the competitors, change the ruled reading now and be done with it. Give any competitor that the rule may effect ample time to comply with to the change. If they don't comply they automatic get bump up to the correct class. If they do comply within the allotted time, all is said and done.

Plain and simple!! 

Just all the dirt slinging just need to stop, Please!!!! It will be hard of enough at mid season for any competitor to make a change, but in the Sprite of MECA lets get it done. We are all human, competitor and R&E board members alike and we all read things and may interrupt thing differently. It is hard to make thing cut and dry with any rules, car audio or other. So fix the reading and then all competitors must comply if said competitor is effect by the change. 

*It Has Been Said, Do Please Let It Be Done. *


----------



## TOOSTUBBORN2FAIL

Matt, if you chime in, i need clarification on post #532. I have a friend that this will directly affect, reguarding the difference between a car rolling off the assembly line with something in it, vs putting something in the factory location when a used car was bought without the option already installed. If the former is the answer, then meca is basically saying the said friend cant compete in a reasonable class without buying a different car.


----------



## Matt R

When an unusual situation comes up that needs review by the R&E committe, we look into it. Since I know you have a Neon and this is hypothetical, I would say put the speakers in the factory location, follow the rules for cutting ect. We would classify your car based on how it is built.

MECA's goal is to provide as close to an even playing field as possible. We are not out to tell people how they can or cant modify their cars. We are just trying to group cars with similar modifications together. Its a simple concept.


----------



## TOOSTUBBORN2FAIL

I understand that, i just needed to check. Its actually for a local neon guy that wants to tag along, and actually has an acr that rolled off the line with no radio. The way it sounded above was that because it rolled off the line without it, he would be in modified or above if speakers were then added.

My personal build in both my wifes car and mine, were both classified as extreme, which im ok with. I just cant personally get behind spirit of the rule clauses. It allows too much leeway to change something after the season has already started. The FIM does this with motocross, and the factory suzuki team has stated it will move its riders to the us nationals next year, and not compete at all in the world championships.


----------



## MacLeod

I was under the impression that it didn't matter if your particular car came with the sub as long as it was offered from the factory as an option. For example, my 07 Accord, I stuck my head unit in the lower storage pocket. I showed the R&E proof that while my car didn't have it, Honda did offer a CD changer/source unit in that location as an option so it was allowed in Street because it was a factory option. 

I would think it would be the same thing here. This particular car didn't come with the sub but it was offered as an option for this car and there is a factory mounting spot and grill in place for the sub so no modification aside from building an enclosure would be required. 

Maybe the other guys are right and NO subs should be allowed in front of the B pillars in Stock and Street. This would be the easiest way to avoid messes like this I suppose. 

And for the record, I am NOT nor have I EVER bashed or trashed MECA or the R&E committe. Like I said earlier I'm on record over several years and several forums as a STAUNCH defender of this organization so I don't want anybody thinking for an instant that I'm questioning the integrity of anybody associated with MECA. This was just a situation I think was handled fubar and warranted a little bitchin'. If we hadn't raised a little hell over this, it likely would've slipped thru the cracks but I guarantee it gets handled for the 2014 rules. I don't agree with boycotts and over the top things like that but as long as these discussions remain reasonable, they're valuable.


----------



## BigAl205

Just out of curiosity, the rules state that "R&E Committee members will have 48 hours to respond to the complaint". What happens if they don't respond in 48 hours? Is the complaint thrown out?


----------



## Darth SQ

MacLeod said:


> I was under the impression that it didn't matter if your particular car came with the sub as long as it was offered from the factory as an option. For example, my 07 Accord, I stuck my head unit in the lower storage pocket. I showed the R&E proof that while my car didn't have it, Honda did offer a CD changer/source unit in that location as an option so it was allowed in Street because it was a factory option.
> 
> I would think it would be the same thing here. This particular car didn't come with the sub but it was offered as an option for this car and there is a factory mounting spot and grill in place for the sub so no modification aside from building an enclosure would be required.
> 
> Maybe the other guys are right and NO subs should be allowed in front of the B pillars in Stock and Street. This would be the easiest way to avoid messes like this I suppose.
> 
> And for the record, I am NOT nor have I EVER bashed or trashed MECA or the R&E committe. Like I said earlier I'm on record over several years and several forums as a STAUNCH defender of this organization so I don't want anybody thinking for an instant that I'm questioning the integrity of anybody associated with MECA. *This was just a situation I think was handled fubar and warranted a little bitchin'. If we hadn't raised a little hell over this, it likely would've slipped thru the cracks but I guarantee it gets handled for the 2014 rules. I don't agree with boycotts and over the top things like that but as long as these discussions remain reasonable, they're valuable*.


This^^^

In no way would The Papasins have finally got the details regarding MECA's committee decision without this thread; this I have no doubt.
It took to the 4th page to get the MECA responses and clarifications in which Richard has now understood and graciously accepted.
It should never had to get to page #2! :shrug:

What was also uncovered in this thread is how the MECA protest process failed which likely the reason it all got so out of hand.
I would sure like to read a comment from you Matt on this and how the committee plans on correcting that issue.


Bret
PPI-ART COLLECTOR


----------



## asota

If all the conditions of the case as presented are non-factual or incomplete I'm sure it would take longer then 48 hours to make a ruling to get all the facts strait, but that wouldn't be R&E fault.


----------



## Darth SQ

asota said:


> If all the conditions of the case as presented are non-factual or incomplete I'm sure it would take longer then 48 hours to make a ruling to get all the facts strait, but that wouldn't be R&E fault.


I think the 48 hour rule is just a requirement that MECA acknowledge the protest.
I don't see how any committee can get a proper decision in that time frame even with complete info.
It's the other mistakes mentioned like the lack of a proper and formal protest and the missing cc'd e-mails to Steve.


Bret
PPI-ART COLLECTOR


----------



## MacLeod

I still don't think this was that complicated. Was the sub in the stock location? Yes. Was it the same size as stock? Yes. Did it use the stock enclosure? No but it doesn't prohibit that in the rules and it was the same size as stock and used the same mounting points. Done. 

Building a custom enclosure for a sub that is the same size and location as stock is no more then being allowed to cut 1/2" of sheet metal on your doors, make a MDF baffle and a boat load of Dynamat for your door speakers.

But again, this isn't about whether or not custom enclosures should be allowed, it's about there being nothing in the rules prohibiting them and by MECA's own admission, the ruling was made based on something that "should've been" in there. That's the sticking point. 

But I think this has run its course. The ruling is made, Papasin seems ok with it now and the R&E boys are aware of the problem and I'm sure this will be fixed. At the end of the day, that's all that matters.


----------



## BigRed

MacLeod said:


> I still don't think this was that complicated. Was the sub in the stock location? Yes. Was it the same size as stock? Yes. Did it use the stock enclosure? No but it doesn't prohibit that in the rules and it was the same size as stock and used the same mounting points. Done.
> 
> Building a custom enclosure for a sub that is the same size and location as stock is no more then being allowed to cut 1/2" of sheet metal on your doors, make a MDF baffle and a boat load of Dynamat for your door speakers.
> 
> But again, this isn't about whether or not custom enclosures should be allowed, it's about there being nothing in the rules prohibiting them and by MECA's own admission, the ruling was made based on something that "should've been" in there. That's the sticking point.


ding ding ding


----------



## slade1274

No, the problem is taking liberty with the dual definition of "subwoofer".

Any other reference in the rulebook to a given component is just that- tweeter, midrange, midbass........ It should be easy to infer that the term subwoofer also refers to the driver, and by making a custom enclosure you eliminate the ability to put an aftermarket low frequency specific transducer in the stock location as you have removed it.

We can argue semantics all day long, but when you take that logical and accurate view you will see that the rules are spelled out quite well regarding this instance. Could they be clearer, yes- but that doesn't mean this particular instance isn't adequate and accurate.


----------



## MacLeod

slade1274 said:


> No, the problem is taking liberty with the dual definition of "subwoofer".
> 
> Any other reference in the rulebook to a given component is just that- tweeter, midrange, midbass........ It should be easy to infer that the term subwoofer also refers to the driver, and by making a custom enclosure you eliminate the ability to put an aftermarket low frequency specific transducer in the stock location as you have removed it.
> 
> We can argue semantics all day long, but when you take that logical and accurate view you will see that the rules are spelled out quite well regarding this instance. Could they be clearer, yes- but that doesn't mean this particular instance isn't adequate and accurate.


Like I said, run its course. The R&E committe is aware of this issue now and I guarantee you the language in the 2014 rules will be much more clear and I have faith that" spirit of the rules" and "should've been" won't be used as basis for a ruling again.


----------



## Darth SQ

MacLeod said:


> Like I said, run its course. The R&E committe is aware of this issue now and I guarantee you the language in the 2014 rules will be much more clear and I have faith that" spirit of the rules" and "should've been" won't be used as basis for a ruling again.


The Richard Rule as it will likely be known. 


Bret
PPI-ART COLLECTOR


----------



## ErinH

*Not intending to say "this is how you should raise your kids". Just offering a different perspective.*


Regarding the kids...

Use this as a moment to teach your kids the MOST IMPORTANT LESSON IN LIFE:
LIFE IS NOT FAIR.

I had a teacher in 7th grade who always replied with the same thing when a classmate would proclaim he was being "unfair". He'd simply say "life isn't fair and this is something you need to learn early on". He was a bit of a d-bag but, ironically, his tongue-in-cheek reply was one of the things that stuck. 

From a parents' perspective, if the kid(s) are truly distraught over this, then use it as the perfect opportunity to teach them that there are times when things don't work out in your favor. Even when you feel you've followed the letter of the law. Sometimes interpretation or intent drives a different result than you expected and you may not always been 


blah blah blah on my part.

My point is: if nothing else, use this as a jump off for a teaching experience. Maybe something good can come from it.


And though you may not be intending for this to come off this way, is there any perception from them that you're quitting because of this unfairness?


----------



## RenoAutoSound

PPI-ART COLLECTOR said:


> The Richard Rule as it will likely be known.
> 
> 
> Bret
> PPI-ART COLLECTOR


Hahaha! Now thats funny!


----------



## Mic10is

bikinpunk said:


> *Not intending to say "this is how you should raise your kids". Just offering a different perspective.*
> 
> 
> Regarding the kids...
> 
> Use this as a moment to teach your kids the MOST IMPORTANT LESSON IN LIFE:
> LIFE IS NOT FAIR.
> 
> I had a teacher in 7th grade who always replied with the same thing when a classmate would proclaim he was being "unfair". He'd simply say "life isn't fair and this is something you need to learn early on". He was a bit of a d-bag but, ironically, his tongue-in-cheek reply was one of the things that stuck.
> 
> From a parents' perspective, if the kid(s) are truly distraught over this, then use it as the perfect opportunity to teach them that there are times when things don't work out in your favor. Even when you feel you've followed the letter of the law. Sometimes interpretation or intent drives a different result than you expected and you may not always been
> 
> 
> blah blah blah on my part.
> 
> My point is: if nothing else, use this as a jump off for a teaching experience. Maybe something good can come from it.
> 
> 
> And though you may not be intending for this to come off this way, is there any perception from them that you're quitting because of this unfairness?



Thanks for bringing this up. Its something I had wanted to say but everytime I tried to put it down it sounded really dickish.


----------



## 14U2SEE

What differentiates MECA are the unique competition classes. It challenges competitor’s creativity to excel in each class.

In regards to front subs being eliminated from the lower classes, one can argue than anyone with custom pods should be in Extreme. If this is the case, folks can simply choose to compete in IASCA.

There are a lot more competitors in California than just the folks on this thread. We represent the spirit of the competition and avoid any opinions that may inadvertently promote animosity against fellow competitors, manufacturers, and contest organizations especially in public forums. 

MECA did the right thing at the end full stop.


----------



## tnaudio

Is it possible to delete this entire thread? It seems all of the hate was based on one important detail that was left out. Now people are coming up with other crazy ideas just to bash MECA. MECA is a positive driving force behind everything this board stands for.


----------



## AccordUno

So can he get the Dealer to install the Factory sub in the factory location and compete in the appropriate class based on it being "Factory"? 

Yes I know it was cleared up, just curious..

Though, I will throw this out there, Not to stir the pot or anything for that matter, just want to make sure this gets some attention. By Restricting certain factory locations, is MECA restricting what cars can be in what classes. Does MECA want to start going down the path where if the item in question is optional, then it's a no-go, even though the Manufacturer offers it as a option?


----------



## MacLeod

tnaudio said:


> Is it possible to delete this entire thread? It seems all of the hate was based on one important detail that was left out. Now people are coming up with other crazy ideas just to bash MECA. MECA is a positive driving force behind everything this board stands for.


A little over dramatic don't ya think? Nobody's bashing anybody. This was something that needed to be brought up and had it not have been brought up here, nothing probably would've been done about it. Things like this have to be brought up and discussed if they're ever gonna be fixed. Yeah you always get the "F you! I'm never competing again" responses but the majority of the posts here were honest discussions. MECA ain't the Vatican. It's ok to call attention to when something isn't handled right and I think by all accounts, this wasn't and if a little hell hadn't been raised here, it would've gone unnoticed. MECA themselves said they thought this was a non issue and had been settled weeks ago. Now they know it is something that needs addressing and I'm sure they will.


----------



## ErinH

tnaudio said:


> MECA is a positive driving force behind everything this board stands for.


Actually, it's the antithesis of what this site was founded on. But that's not really the topic here.


----------



## thehatedguy

Yeah I don't understand the point of this particular car having the option or not...as long it was an option for any of those cars. doing the other way would require running a VIN check to see what the factory options were when the car was bought new.


----------



## Matt R

MacLeod said:


> I was under the impression that it didn't matter if your particular car came with the sub as long as it was offered from the factory as an option. For example, my 07 Accord, I stuck my head unit in the lower storage pocket. I showed the R&E proof that while my car didn't have it, Honda did offer a CD changer/source unit in that location as an option so it was allowed in Street because it was a factory option.
> 
> I would think it would be the same thing here. This particular car didn't come with the sub but it was offered as an option for this car and there is a factory mounting spot and grill in place for the sub so no modification aside from building an enclosure would be required.
> 
> Maybe the other guys are right and NO subs should be allowed in front of the B pillars in Stock and Street. This would be the easiest way to avoid messes like this I suppose.
> 
> And for the record, I am NOT nor have I EVER bashed or trashed MECA or the R&E committe. Like I said earlier I'm on record over several years and several forums as a STAUNCH defender of this organization so I don't want anybody thinking for an instant that I'm questioning the integrity of anybody associated with MECA. This was just a situation I think was handled fubar and warranted a little bitchin'. If we hadn't raised a little hell over this, it likely would've slipped thru the cracks but I guarantee it gets handled for the 2014 rules. I don't agree with boycotts and over the top things like that but as long as these discussions remain reasonable, they're valuable.


The classes are seperated by the main factor we believe makes a vehicle sound good, the speaker locations and install. Moving a HU to a different location of a vehicle is in no way the same as adding a custom speaker enclosure in the vehicle. We have to take each case and and find the right solution for that case. There is no blanket statement that can cover all these situations.



MacLeod said:


> I still don't think this was that complicated. Was the sub in the stock location? Yes. Was it the same size as stock? Yes. Did it use the stock enclosure? No but it doesn't prohibit that in the rules and it was the same size as stock and used the same mounting points. Done.
> 
> Building a custom enclosure for a sub that is the same size and location as stock is no more then being allowed to cut 1/2" of sheet metal on your doors, make a MDF baffle and a boat load of Dynamat for your door speakers.
> 
> But again, this isn't about whether or not custom enclosures should be allowed, it's about there being nothing in the rules prohibiting them and by MECA's own admission, the ruling was made based on something that "should've been" in there. That's the sticking point.
> 
> But I think this has run its course. The ruling is made, Papasin seems ok with it now and the R&E boys are aware of the problem and I'm sure this will be fixed. At the end of the day, that's all that matters.


You really think adding dynamat to a door with a baffle is the same as adding a custom enclosure under the dash? That is what we're talking about right? I will take a properly built enclosure over any door any day of the week. Comparing the two seems crazy to me.



AccordUno said:


> So can he get the Dealer to install the Factory sub in the factory location and compete in the appropriate class based on it being "Factory"?
> 
> Yes I know it was cleared up, just curious..
> 
> Though, I will throw this out there, Not to stir the pot or anything for that matter, just want to make sure this gets some attention. By Restricting certain factory locations, is MECA restricting what cars can be in what classes. Does MECA want to start going down the path where if the item in question is optional, then it's a no-go, even though the Manufacturer offers it as a option?


We've spent a good bit of time researching this situation and it appears the woofer option is a dealer/aftermarket option. Kind of like getting chrome wheels from the dealership, not the factory. The original subwoofer in the car would have been located under the seat.

I do know of some BMW's and some Mercedes' that have front subs from the factory. These cars are ok to compete in any class in MECAas long as all other requirements are adheared to. 

The rational behind this is: Car manufacturers that design an audio system with a sub very rarely produce quality enough sound to compete with a good aftermarket system. If you have a system in a BMW with 8's under the seats in those cheap plastic enclosures, we dont feel you have an advantage over the average car with door speakers. I cant speak for the build quality of the Mercedes sub enclosure but i'm guessing its plastic and not optimized for what we do. No giving it a huge advantage over other vehicles that may be competing against it.


----------



## pocket5s

thehatedguy said:


> Yeah I don't understand the point of this particular car having the option or not...as long it was an option for any of those cars. doing the other way would require running a VIN check to see what the factory options were when the car was bought new.


^^^ This... 

The rules never say 'it has to come with one to qualify'. Whether they bought their car with it or not is irrelevant. It is a factory location. End of story.

It seems as if rules are being written on the fly, in the middle of the season. _*That*_ is the big problem here, not necessarily the end solution to this particular use case.

You want to rule out up front sub completely below modified? fine, update the rules _for the next season_. I believe that and stripping points without allowing the option of moving to a new class or whatever (as I understood it) are what upsets people the most. The rest is just gritty details and splitting hairs, IMO.

To make it worse, this isn't the first time something like this has happened. IIRC this is the 4th in about a year's time. It is much harder for people to accept rule changes when there is no room to prepare for them.


----------



## Schizm

Perhaps if its a dealer option and not factory it then doesn't meet the rule of factory location. 

But this is something that should have been decided week one or two. Much earlier on. 

I'm still leaning towards being on team MrsPapasin. 

Though I also wonder how much better does that up front 8 sound over a very nice 12 in a optimal box in the trunk of that car?

Edit to add verbage


----------



## thehatedguy

Ahhhh, so it's a dealer installed option? And not from the factory that way? That's a bit more gray area-ish.


----------



## pocket5s

If the factory designed the location to accept the speaker (brackets, wiring harness, etc), it is by definition a factory location. Far different than dealer installed wheels or decals or whatever. 

I understand the point about a non factory enclosure being more beneficial than a factory one, but the rules saying nothing of the sort. What if they took the crappy plastic enclosure, wrapped and bonded mdf to it to make it more rigid, what then. Lol.

Again, the point being, it says factory location. It may have been a loop hole, but that's the rules. Change them for the following season if desired.


----------



## MacLeod

Matt R said:


> The classes are seperated by the main factor we believe makes a vehicle sound good, the speaker locations and install. Moving a HU to a different location of a vehicle is in no way the same as adding a custom speaker enclosure in the vehicle. We have to take each case and and find the right solution for that case. There is no blanket statement that can cover all these situations.


Street class only allows what was offered by the factory. Honda offered a head unit in the lower storage of the Accord so I could put my CD player there even tho my particular car didn't have one. If it's offered from the factory, you can use it regardless if you checked off that particular option when you bought the car or not. That model Smart car does offer a dash sub as an option but Papasin didn't get that option but he should still be able to put one there. 

There is a statement that can cover it. Either (A) outlaw them completely forward the B pillars in the lower classes which would be the easiest or (B) state you can use the factory sub location but must use the factory enclosure which would be the next easiest or (C) you can use a custom enclosure so long as it's the same size as the stocker and fits in the stock location without modification like taking out AC ducting and so on. 



> You really think adding dynamat to a door with a baffle is the same as adding a custom enclosure under the dash? That is what we're talking about right? I will take a properly built enclosure over any door any day of the week. Comparing the two seems crazy to me.


No I do not think they're the same but you're allowed to do quite a bit to the door panel even in Street. I don't see it as any more modification than making an enclosure the same size and shape as the stocker and fitting in the same location. I'm not saying it's the same effect, I'm saying it's no more modification than what you're allowed to do to a door. 

I'm totally with you if you're talking about replacing a tiny little OEM box with a larger ported box or something like that or if you have to modify anything under the dash to make it fit but if it's a drop in replacement for the stock, just sturdier, I don't see it as a big deal. Most aftermarket subs won't fit in the stock box anyway and they're so flimsy that they're basically worthless and not really usable. 

But for the umpteenth time, I don't really care if you guys allow them or ban them altogether. My only point this entire time is that if it's not in the rules anywhere that you can't replace the stock box then you can't penalize a competitor for replacing it. That and that alone is what stirred all this up. If the rules stated that you had to use the OEM enclosure, this thread would be 4 or 5 pages shorter cause this never would've come up. 

I totally agree that you guys can't think of everything when writing the rule book but replacing the stock enclosure for a dash sub is not a gray area or something nobody's ever done or heard of before and if it's not in the rules as prohibited I understand somebody thinking it was ok to do. 

Whether you think it's a big deal that shouldn't be allowed or not, it wasn't in the rules as prohibited and should not have been ruled prohibited based on "it should have been in the rules" or some vague "spirit of the rules". 

Yeesh, we're going around in circles here. I'm sure this mess will be addressed and cleaned up when you guys do the 2014 rules and that's what matters.

Done. I've said my piece and I'm Seacrest out.


----------



## Team Bassick - Kimo

It never amazes me no matter how HOT and HEATED the discussion gets that in the end cool and rational prevails. 

COMMUNICATION!!!!!

Communication verbal, written and procedural had a major break down in this “situation”. Even the “Facts” in this situation has been hard to communicate clearly. As much discussion that the forum has had because of this it is clear that it was an eye opener to many. Now as seasoned competitors this kind of heated discussions/conversations are not new territory. None of which would be an issue if we were not all passionate about car audio. Unfortunately, it was at the expense of a family who chose to take our shared passion and try competition. 

Back in the 90’s when there were big shows and seeing 50 plus cars at every show, things were great, right? Well since then, and with the help of the internet, it has created “The Competitor” and when this happen this is when organizations started catering to them and loss their purpose which was to show case the car audio industry and retailers. It is my honest belief MECA is best suited for new comers to the world of car audio competition. Not to mention it would allow “Do It Yourself” as well as “Retail Stores” to enter back into the world of Car Audio Competition instead of just “The Competitor”. 

Richard and Linda embraced MECA with open arms as it seemed it was something designed for the family to do. They would bring three separate vehicles to competitions at times. Their SMART, Civic (to compete in SQ) and the support vehicle; to transport their MK1 SMART and their children. Being Rookie’s to competition they followed the rule book to the “Letter”. Little did they know the Monster known as the Competitor Community. Now after being picked on, analyzed, probed, chewed on and then spit out they are still able to collect themselves and try to move forward. Needless to say the passion and drive to compete has left. The competition scene is slowly dying and when good people are treated like they are dirt and met with the attitudes short of “HEY STUPID, WTF ARE YOU THINKING??”. It is really no wonder why the competition scene is in the state we are in. 

I have sincerely apologized to them. They are truly a sweet couple and had no ill intent of finding a grey area. They built an economical and sound vehicle which if anything was just as efficient as the car itself. After which they tuned and tuned and with the feedback they received at competitions they were having fun. Now, halfway through the season to get an unofficial protest, a request for documentation, an unofficial classification ruling approval, an untimely official classification ruling option, an unclear explanation, a ton of criticism and accusations can we honest blame them for being so defensive and hurt. I/We dropped the ball on this and it is my sincere apology to them both again for this ordeal.

A formal public apology for the emotional impact this situation has brought upon their family is not much to ask for.


Further discussion of the rules should continue and hopefully it will make for some better rule clarification in the future. As the issue with the SMART considered it CLOSED!!

I hope to judge the SMART again in the future.


----------



## Darth SQ

pocket5s said:


> *If the factory designed the location to accept the speaker (brackets, wiring harness, etc), it is by definition a factory location. Far different than dealer installed wheels or decals or whatever. *
> I understand the point about a non factory enclosure being more beneficial than a factory one, but the rules saying nothing of the sort. What if they took the crappy plastic enclosure, wrapped and bonded mdf to it to make it more rigid, what then. Lol.
> 
> Again, the point being, it says factory location. It may have been a loop hole, but that's the rules. Change them for the following season if desired.


This (in bold) ^^^^^

There's no two ways around it.
The factory designed the vehicle for it's implementation......period.

Here's my example.
I competed in MECA SQL at the Sacramento Autorama earlier this year with my 02 Honda Odyssey in stock class and took first place against other competitors.
The entire system was and is completely stock.
The subwoofer (with built in amplifier) mounted under the driver seat was a Honda option installed at the dealer when I bought the vehicle brand new.
My situation is no different than exactly what pocket5s has described and no different than if I had bought a Smart and had the optional front mounted subwoofer installed before delivery.
Does this mean I can no longer compete in stock class either?
Do I have to give back my trophy?

Pandora's box has been opened.


Bret
PPI-ART COLLECTOR


----------



## Darth SQ

Team Bassick - Kimo said:


> It never amazes me no matter how HOT and HEATED the discussion gets that in the end cool and rational prevails.
> 
> COMMUNICATION!!!!!
> 
> Communication verbal, written and procedural had a major break down in this “situation”. Even the “Facts” in this situation has been hard to communicate clearly. As much discussion that the forum has had because of this it is clear that it was an eye opener to many. Now as seasoned competitors this kind of heated discussions/conversations are not new territory. None of which would be an issue if we were not all passionate about car audio. Unfortunately, it was at the expense of a family who chose to take our shared passion and try competition.
> 
> Back in the 90’s when there were big shows and seeing 50 plus cars at every show, things were great, right? Well since then, and with the help of the internet, it has created “The Competitor” and when this happen this is when organizations started catering to them and loss their purpose which was to show case the car audio industry and retailers. It is my honest belief MECA is best suited for new comers to the world of car audio competition. Not to mention it would allow “Do It Yourself” as well as “Retail Stores” to enter back into the world of Car Audio Competition instead of just “The Competitor”.
> 
> Richard and Linda embraced MECA with open arms as it seemed it was something designed for the family to do. They would bring three separate vehicles to competitions at times. Their SMART, Civic (to compete in SQ) and the support vehicle; to transport their MK1 SMART and their children. Being Rookie’s to competition they followed the rule book to the “Letter”. Little did they know the Monster known as the Competitor Community. Now after being picked on, analyzed, probed, chewed on and then spit out they are still able to collect themselves and try to move forward. Needless to say the passion and drive to compete has left. The competition scene is slowly dying and when good people are treated like they are dirt and met with the attitudes short of “HEY STUPID, WTF ARE YOU THINKING??”. It is really no wonder why the competition scene is in the state we are in.
> 
> I have sincerely apologized to them. They are truly a sweet couple and had no ill intent of finding a grey area. They built an economical and sound vehicle which if anything was just as efficient as the car itself. After which they tuned and tuned and with the feedback they received at competitions they were having fun. Now, halfway through the season to get an unofficial protest, a request for documentation, an unofficial classification ruling approval, an untimely official classification ruling option, an unclear explanation, a ton of criticism and accusations can we honest blame them for being so defensive and hurt. I/We dropped the ball on this and it is my sincere apology to them both again for this ordeal.
> 
> A formal public apology for the emotional impact this situation has brought upon their family is not much to ask for.
> 
> 
> Further discussion of the rules should continue and hopefully it will make for some better rule clarification in the future. As the issue with the SMART considered it CLOSED!!
> 
> I hope to judge the SMART again in the future.


You're a stand up guy Kimo!
Well said and well done.
I am proud to call you my friend.
I'll be buying you lunch at the next NorCal comp. :thumbsup:


_A side note, if you saw Kimo and I together, you'd know that buying lunch is going to be expensive._ :surprised:


Bret
PPI-ART COLLECTOR


----------



## Mic10is

I must be one of the few that sees a difference between Buying a car with no options and than trying to claim that available option as a viable reason to do something else.

The Car didnt come with the option when the owner purchased it.
For the purpose of putting a stereo in the car, the owner bought an aftermarket enclosure, aftermarket sub and put it in a location where a Higher model Option speaker would have been available.

So we have a custom built enclosure w/ subwoofer in a location that the car originally did not come with.

How is this really any different than someone with a GMC Yukon or Tahoe buying a Jl Stealthbox which is custom made specifically for that vehicle and integrates seamlessly so noone would even know that its aftermarket except the owner?

Or any JL stealthbox which can put a sub up front under a console or similar?
Its custom made for a vehicle that did not come with it.

It would look and function better than most OEM as well.


----------



## Darth SQ

Mic10is said:


> I must be one of the few that sees a difference between Buying a car with no options and than trying to claim that available option as a viable reason to do something else.
> 
> The Car didnt come with the option when the owner purchased it.
> For the purpose of putting a stereo in the car, the owner bought an aftermarket enclosure, aftermarket sub and put it in a location where a Higher model Option speaker would have been available.
> 
> So we have a custom built enclosure w/ subwoofer in a location that the car originally did not come with.
> 
> How is this really any different than someone with a GMC Yukon or Tahoe buying a Jl Stealthbox which is custom made specifically for that vehicle and integrates seamlessly so noone would even know that its aftermarket except the owner?
> 
> Or any JL stealthbox which can put a sub up front under a console or similar?
> Its custom made for a vehicle that did not come with it.
> 
> It would look and function better than most OEM as well.


I think the simple answer to differentiate the two scenarios is if the vehicle came equipped from the factory with the subwoofer wiring pigtail already present in the main interior harness all ready for use and the bracket ears in the firewall to mount the enclosure are also present and again, ready for use.
Just like my Odyssey was under the driver seat.


Bret
PPI-ART COLLECTOR


----------



## Mic10is

PPI-ART COLLECTOR said:


> I think the simple answer to differentiate the two scenarios is if the vehicle came equipped from the factory with the subwoofer wiring pigtail already present in the main interior harness all ready for use and the bracket ears in the firewall to mount the enclosure are also present and again, ready for use.
> Just like my Odyssey was under the driver seat.
> 
> 
> Bret
> PPI-ART COLLECTOR


I dont believe the factory wiring was used, just the brackets.

with JL stealthboxes, Most will mount using all factory mounting points with no additional drilling etc...


----------



## KP

Any pictures ever posted? Seems a couple quick pictures would speak volumes.


----------



## Mic10is

AcuraTLSQ said:


> Any pictures ever posted? Seems a couple quick pictures would speak volumes.


http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum/1508958-post3.html


----------



## pocket5s

Mic10is said:


> I dont believe the factory wiring was used, just the brackets.
> 
> with JL stealthboxes, Most will mount using all factory mounting points with no additional drilling etc...


Difference being the factory designed it for a sub there. If there is a wiring connection from the factory harness, it was meant to be a factory intention to have a sub there, Installed or not. Whether that factory wiring was used isnt the point. 

A JL box was never a factory intention. Sure they bolt in to factory holes, but those holes are not meant to bolt a sub in. If the brackets used in the smart car were originally meant for a factory sub enclosure, it is a factory location.


----------



## TOOSTUBBORN2FAIL

agreed with pocket5s, also, whether the stock wiring is used isn't any more important than if the stock door wiring was used. 

In the end, the letter of the rules were not violated in any way that I or many others can see. If anyone can please explain how the letter of the rules have been violated, please do. The rules say nothing about the enclosure having to be stock, just that it must be in the stock location. If the stock location means in the stock enclosure, that needs to be stated in the rules, as the average person would not come to that conclusion. The intent of the rules were different, and Meca has decided to penalize a competitor because they should have written it differently, but didn't. That's not ok, but seems to be the way it goes. Life isn't fair, but we can choose whether or not to continue to be part of an organization that has done this on more than one occasion. This isn't the first time, and it wont be the last.


I personally propose a points system for separating classes. It wouldn't be that hard to assign a fair points value to different modifications, and use the combined total per car to determine what class someone belongs in. The reason I thought of this, is from my own personal experience. With my first build, I was placed in modex, due to modified seat brackets. Now, I'm not complaining about that. I personally don't care what class I'm in, as I stated earlier. But, as a hypothetical question, say my friend wants to compete. He has a dead stock toyota celica. After sitting in my car, he had me help him modify his seat brackets. His reasoning had nothing to do with audio, but due to the fact that he is 6'6" tall in a small car. Now, I've been trying to convince several friends (including the one with the ACR and this one) to tag along to events, to try to get more people involved and spread quality car audio to outside people. Now, would it really make sense to put this guy in modex, with his dead stock car, because his extended seat brackets? 

It should be fairly simple to come up with a points solution, and I would highly recommend it. It may not be something that can be done in a year, but in the end, its probably the most likely way to avoid things like this from coming up.


----------



## jtaudioacc

i hope no one competes with an old toyota truck, they didn't even come with a radio. lol


----------



## AccordUno

Mic, come on now, you are going to mention JL Stealthboxes.. Granted JL has done their homework on them, but not all of them are go in factory locations or replace factory enclosures. I wish JL made a enclosure that fit under my seat of my titan.. 

Still the question begs an answer, If he was to go with the one that mounts under the seat, can he stick to his street class? OR will this be a midseason rule/class change?

Might as well throw this out there, let's say I take the nissan titan factory enclosure and add the same one to the passenger front seat with a different sub, bolts right in or take the one under the driver side and mount it passenger side instead because I need that room for something else.. how will that play out?

Just so everyone knows folks have been following the rules in all organization and all flaws have been exploited for a very long time. It's nothing new. Viewing some of the post, I can tell some of you have the surprised look going. The difference is how things are handled by the organizations. R&E wrote the rules, missed something, competitor saw the gray area, ran with it, someone complained, competitor pays the price, for a mistake by R&E committee.. BTDT. Funny thing, I seen it before in MECA, so I'm not really surprised, except that time the competitor actually made it to finals won his class and then booked, all while accusing a team of cheating. 

Which also leads to something that has been done in the past, competitor A has been stomping competitor B, competitor B can't figure out how to improve their car, so competitor B complains that competitor A is cheating or some other BS, organization comes down hard on competitor A, and competitor B starts to win without actually working on improving their vehicle. BTDT as well. I will tell you all this, if can't compete against a competitor, do you damn homework and work hard so you can compete, not whine about it, especially to the organization. I competed in 3 classes in MECA, every year I moved up in class to compete at a much harder level, I had to step up my game when I went into what was the MASTER class. did I win a few yes, did I win my class in finals, nope, did I complain, nope, just came back the following year and competed harder. 

In case anyone is wondering my credentials: I judged prior to going back to compete in MECA, MECA finals Champ, placed 2nd place at finals (twice) all of which were in different classes, with a car that I built in my driveway or garage. my scores where 85+ highest being in the low 90s. Those were the fun days, trash talking while making everyone around you better by pushing each other..


----------



## Neil_J

AccordUno said:


> Mic, come on now, you are going to mention JL Stealthboxes.. Granted JL has done their homework on them, but not all of them are go in factory locations or replace factory enclosures. I wish JL made a enclosure that fit under my seat of my titan..
> 
> Still the question begs an answer, If he was to go with the one that mounts under the seat, can he stick to his street class? OR will this be a midseason rule/class change?
> 
> Might as well throw this out there, let's say I take the nissan titan factory enclosure and add the same one to the passenger front seat with a different sub, bolts right in or take the one under the driver side and mount it passenger side instead because I need that room for something else.. how will that play out?
> 
> Just so everyone knows folks have been following the rules in all organization and all flaws have been exploited for a very long time. It's nothing new. Viewing some of the post, I can tell some of you have the surprised look going. The difference is how things are handled by the organizations. R&E wrote the rules, missed something, competitor saw the gray area, ran with it, someone complained, competitor pays the price, for a mistake by R&E committee.. BTDT. Funny thing, I seen it before in MECA, so I'm not really surprised, except that time the competitor actually made it to finals won his class and then booked, all while accusing a team of cheating.
> 
> Which also leads to something that has been done in the past, competitor A has been stomping competitor B, competitor B can't figure out how to improve their car, so competitor B complains that competitor A is cheating or some other BS, organization comes down hard on competitor A, and competitor B starts to win without actually working on improving their vehicle. BTDT as well. I will tell you all this, if can't compete against a competitor, do you damn homework and work hard so you can compete, not whine about it, especially to the organization. I competed in 3 classes in MECA, every year I moved up in class to compete at a much harder level, I had to step up my game when I went into what was the MASTER class. did I win a few yes, did I win my class in finals, nope, did I complain, nope, just came back the following year and competed harder.
> 
> In case anyone is wondering my credentials: I judged prior to going back to compete in MECA, MECA finals Champ, placed 2nd place at finals (twice) all of which were in different classes, with a car that I built in my driveway or garage. my scores where 85+ highest being in the low 90s. Those were the fun days, trash talking while making everyone around you better by pushing each other..


Very well spoken, sir.


----------



## spyders03

cajunner said:


> if they allow the car to compete with the sub, how many Smart cars are gonna be entering competition, I mean it must be a HUGE advantage...


I don't really see a problem with it. Do BMW's have a huge advantage because they have sub size speakers in the doors? Would any electric car have a HUGE advantage because they have 5 times the batteries of most SPL guys that compete?

Or even in my case (stock class), am I in violation because I am using speakers in the dash, even though MY car did not come with any? The factory has options for better stereos than what mine came with, and they put the baffles, mounting points, grilles, and even wiring harness to the FACTORY locations. Some could say that I have a HUGE advantage because I am the only person in stock class running a 3 way setup. Now, I'm not taking first at every event, but that's not the issue. I am using speakers the same size (actually smaller) than what the factory would have put in there, had MY vehicle had the premium stereo option, but it didn't. So, in the Spirit of the rules, since they are in the factory locations, and I am using a smaller speaker than what was originally in there, it is ok? Just because it is not optimal, like using a plastic box under the front seat? Or because it is not a subwoofer in the dash, and I am using a speaker with a cone area no larger than the factory speaker?

My car was even available with an under front seat sub, and all the wiring is there for it. An under seat sub and a 3 way, and I still wouldn't be able to take first. Im actually at a disadvantage right now using a 3 way front stage...


----------



## Matt R

Alright, so some of you guys arent differentiating between the sub (speaker) and the enclosure (mounting baffle/location). the subwoofer (speaker) is installed in the factory location if it's mounted to the original baffle or enclosure.

Thats not hard to understand!!!!

You are allowed to modify the mounting area to accomodate a larger flange for the same size speaker. You can NOT replace the enclosure all together.

From the info MECA obtained, Scott Owens designed and built the original SMART car enclosure. He apparently sold his design to a few companies to manufacture it as well. He was working with local dealers and was a dealer option. YES it was like chrome wheels or leather seats that the dealer offers. No it wasn't a factory option. The wires would not be there the brackets would come with the sub kit to mount to factory holes (not originally intended for a speaker)

Everything about this is aftermarket!!!!!!


----------



## ErinH

Congrats to Scott for marketing his design.


----------



## slade1274

Matt R said:


> Alright, so some of you guys arent differentiating between the sub (speaker) and the enclosure (mounting baffle/location). the subwoofer (speaker) is installed in the factory location if it's mounted to the original baffle or enclosure.
> 
> Thats not hard to understand!!!!


Yep....I even Tried to essplain it twice in different communication styles- and neither were acknowledged. I have a few theories as to why, but none are positive and all will just stir more **** up. 

Being wrong is OK folks.... failure to grow from teachable lessons is itself a failure.


----------



## asota

slade1274 said:


> Yep....I even Tried to essplain it twice in different communication styles- and neither were acknowledged. I have a few theories as to why, but none are positive and all will just stir more **** up.
> 
> Being wrong is OK folks.... failure to grow from teachable lessons is itself a failure.


X3 I agree 100% but I did get a good laugh out of some of the response's.


----------



## BigRed

Matt R said:


> Alright, so some of you guys arent differentiating between the sub (speaker) and the enclosure (mounting baffle/location). the subwoofer (speaker) is installed in the factory location if it's mounted to the original baffle or enclosure.
> 
> Thats not hard to understand!!!!
> 
> *You are allowed to modify the mounting area to accomodate a larger flange for the same size speaker. You can NOT replace the enclosure all together.*From the info MECA obtained, Scott Owens designed and built the original SMART car enclosure. He apparently sold his design to a few companies to manufacture it as well. He was working with local dealers and was a dealer option. YES it was like chrome wheels or leather seats that the dealer offers. No it wasn't a factory option. The wires would not be there the brackets would come with the sub kit to mount to factory holes (not originally intended for a speaker)
> 
> Everything about this is aftermarket!!!!!!


suggestion: write that in the rules next season very clearly


----------



## Neil_J

BigRed said:


> suggestion: write that in the rules next season very clearly


That was my suggestion as well, I really don't take anything back that I said (in this thread or otherwise), and nothing that's been said here changes my stance. Not that anyone cares either way, but again, it needs to be said. As a newcomer to MECA my experience has been crap, plain and simple. And I do believe that the veterans, judges, and MECA personnel are somewhat disconnected about how frustrating it can be as a newcomer, not knowing all the "tribal knowledge" you guys have collected over the years (decades?). That's what I see as the problem.


----------



## Mic10is

Neil_J said:


> That was my suggestion as well, I really don't take anything back that I said (in this thread or otherwise), and nothing that's been said here changes my stance. Not that anyone cares either way, but again, it needs to be said. As a newcomer to MECA my experience has been crap, plain and simple. And I do believe that the veterans, judges, and MECA personnel are somewhat disconnected about how frustrating it can be as a newcomer, not knowing all the "tribal knowledge" you guys have collected over the years (decades?). That's what I see as the problem.


At the end of each season, MECA, IASCA and even USACi all ask competitors for input for rules revisions.
MECA is actually pretty open to receiving input from its competitor base, as is IASCA.

So rules suggestions, clarifications, suggested changes etc....are always welcome

This may or may not be known to most competitors. It isnt highly advertised, that I know for sure--but the suggestion box is always open.

could the lines of communication be more open? YES, Definitely.

One major problem is that many new competitors or even many who have only been doing it a few years are afraid to ever speak up about any rule changes, suggestions or provide any input until something directly affects them and even then, its only a few who ever speak out.

I have been quite vocal with rule suggestions and have spent months getting input from others on my various teams over the years, bouncing ideas off people and even drafting stage maps etc....
Some of the input gets moved on, some gets passed over.

End point, be more part of the solution and less part of the problem.


----------



## Neil_J

Mic10is said:


> At the end of each season, MECA, IASCA and even USACi all ask competitors for input for rules revisions.
> MECA is actually pretty open to receiving input from its competitor base, as is IASCA.
> 
> So rules suggestions, clarifications, suggested changes etc....are always welcome


It's certainly not spelled out in the rules that they are soliciting that kind of feedback -- Seems like another case of tribal knowledge to me. It's not spelled out on their website either. Who do I contact? The commissioner? Rules questions? R&E committee? The judges that I had a problem with? All of the above? Here's a better question. Were you comfortable going at the higher-ups for any issues you had in your first year or so competing? Most newcomers wouldn't likely be that comfortable doing that since they're still learning the ropes, and are still too humble to tell judges or R&E committees that they're the ones in the wrong. As vocal as I've been, I'm still not comfortable doing this. I'm just frustrated by the whole thing (I'm not the only one), and am walking away at a loss, because I'm not hopeful that anything will change.


----------



## Mic10is

Neil_J said:


> It's certainly not spelled out in the rules that they are soliciting that kind of feedback -- Seems like another case of tribal knowledge to me. It's not spelled out on their website either. Who do I contact? The commissioner? Rules questions? R&E committee? The judges that I had a problem with? All of the above? Here's a better question. Were you comfortable going at the higher-ups for any issues you had in your first year or so competing? Most newcomers wouldn't likely be that comfortable doing that since they're still learning the ropes, and are still too humble to tell judges or R&E committees that they're the ones in the wrong. As vocal as I've been, I'm still not comfortable doing this. I'm just frustrated by the whole thing (I'm not the only one), and am walking away at a loss, because I'm not hopeful that anything will change.


Here is one example
http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum/12-volt-events-team-diyma/120751-2012-meca-rules.html


But there is one thing to make a suggestion and another thing to ***** and complain about how things are...
Quite often is how things are framed and presented.

When I started competing, there was no MECA and IASCA nor USAC were that open to suggestions from competitors but made a host of decisions and class and rule changes while I competed. I simply just read the rulebook, asked people I trusted if I didnt understand and moved forward with my builds and competing.

my 1st MECA show was in 2009, actually 2006 I entered one MECA event bc it was in the same location as an IASCA Regional, but the 1st time I REALLY competed wasnt til 2009. By then I had already won IASCA Finals, won spring break nationals, had a magazine feature, retired and come out of retirement.:laugh:
so I was slightly more comfortable than most new people.

Yes I completely understand that the new guy, doesnt want to be, THAT, guy and complain or make suggestions.

I have friends who are veteran competitors who still wont speak up even after they actually have been screwed over at shows...or when they do its months after the event/incident took place. by then its difficult to come up with an appropriate solution.

If you feel you were wronged, I would highly encourage you to at least Bring it to someone's attention. Either your State Representative or on most Days Stern himself is approachable by Phone.
There are some really good people like Matt Roberts, Dave Hogan, Jeremy Clutts, Steve Head that are on the R&E committee and would be willing to address your situation.

If you have an issue with IASCA, feel free to msg me in private and I will present it to Moe. But honestly, Moe is one of THE most approachable people I know. He will listen openly and hear everything before you gives you an answer.

again tho, regardless its how things are presented.

if the conversation starts with--Who do I talk to about getting screwed over by your ****ty judges at that crap event last weekend....I can bet the conversation wont go as well as you hope

Conflict is when expectations meet reality


----------



## Neil_J

Mic10is said:


> I have friends who are veteran competitors who still wont speak up even after they actually have been screwed over at shows...or when they do its months after the event/incident took place. by then its difficult to come up with an appropriate solution.


Yep. And in my opinion, as long as certain people are sitting on the R&E, it won't change much, even if they did, which is probably why they haven't said anything, and why I'm not actively trying to change things through any sort of appeal process. Call it what you want. Pessimistic, defeatist, I really don't care, I'll have money left in my bank account and less miles on my car.



> If you feel you were wronged, I would highly encourage you to at least Bring it to someone's attention. Either your State Representative or on most Days Stern himself is approachable by Phone.
> There are some really good people like Matt Roberts, Dave Hogan, Jeremy Clutts, Steve Head that are on the R&E committee and would be willing to address your situation.


I never said that I was "wronged". It's all a matter of misplaced expectations based off of a ****ty set of rules (as I said, they're not articulated well, there is tribal knowledge that the MECA R&E committee are holding out on, and not putting in the rules as they should. I read and write government requirements documents all day, unlike audio, it's actually something that I know well). 

I will say that most of the judges I met at events were extremely courteous and very helpful, and for that I'm eternally grateful.


----------



## MacLeod

Matt R said:


> Alright, so some of you guys arent differentiating between the sub (speaker) and the enclosure (mounting baffle/location). the subwoofer (speaker) is installed in the factory location if it's mounted to the original baffle or enclosure.
> 
> Thats not hard to understand!!!!
> 
> You are allowed to modify the mounting area to accomodate a larger flange for the same size speaker. You can NOT replace the enclosure all together.
> 
> From the info MECA obtained, Scott Owens designed and built the original SMART car enclosure. He apparently sold his design to a few companies to manufacture it as well. He was working with local dealers and was a dealer option. YES it was like chrome wheels or leather seats that the dealer offers. No it wasn't a factory option. The wires would not be there the brackets would come with the sub kit to mount to factory holes (not originally intended for a speaker)
> 
> Everything about this is aftermarket!!!!!!


Alright I lied, I'm back in. 

Everything we've read so far has been this is a factory offered option. Now you're saying it's not. It's an optional accessory a dealer can install. 

If that's the case then the ruling was indeed correct. If it's not a factory option then all this is academic. An accessory a dealer can install for you is no different than what your local stereo shop can install for you. It has to be offered from the assembly line floor. 

The thing I don't understand is why this is just being brought up now? The emails from MECA are throwing around "should've been there" and "spirit of the rules" and that is was all because Papasin was using a factory enclosure . Up til now, nobody disputed this was a factory option. It would've saved a lot of bandwidth if this had been brought up in the beginning.


----------



## BigRed

they submitted proof that a factory sub does go there. See below:

Subject: RE: Smart Car Subwoofer Factory Locations
>> 
>> Linda,
>> Thank you for contacting us regarding your SMART Passion Coupe subwoofer factory location. Attached you will find the location of where your Subwoofer is located (under the dash of the passenger footwell).
>> Below is a digital photo of the location as well for your confirmation. Good luck in your competition and swing by the dealership to view your car.
>> 
> 
>> - Thank you for your business.
>> 
>> Bilha Diaz
>> Parts Specialist / Boutique Manager
>> Master Certified Mercedes Benz
>> BESHOFF MOTORCARS
>> 3000 E. Capital Expwy, San Jose, CA 95148
>> ph. 408-239-2470
>> fax. 408-239-2392

The initial ruling was not questioning the factory location. The R&E ruled because it was not in the factory enclosure etc.... that it should not be in street. and the "spirit" of the rules was mentioned as well as Stern himself admitting the rule should have read something else.

Again, a simple fix is to make the rules more clearer. I don't think everything can be covered, but this example has pointed to the direction of the rules being more detailed in the future.


----------



## AccordUno

MacLeod said:


> Alright I lied, I'm back in.
> An accessory a dealer can install for you is no different than what your local stereo shop can install for you. It has to be offered from the assembly line floor.


I disagree with this statement. A prime example, Nissan Titan Tow Package, it can come from the factory or you can add it as an option and have it the dealer install. Basically, it's relays, trailer hitch, wiring at the hitch, mirrors, and ball. All of which comes from Nissan and not from some aftermarket supplier. I didn't get the option went to uhaul got the hitch and relays, instead of paying the exuberant price for the same damn thing.

So in actuality, it should state that anything that is Aftermarket and not specifically in the Manufacturer's part Database..

And yes, I do have a vested interest in this.


----------



## MacLeod

AccordUno said:


> I disagree with this statement. A prime example, Nissan Titan Tow Package, it can come from the factory or you can add it as an option and have it the dealer install. Basically, it's relays, trailer hitch, wiring at the hitch, mirrors, and ball. All of which comes from Nissan and not from some aftermarket supplier. I didn't get the option went to uhaul got the hitch and relays, instead of paying the exuberant price for the same damn thing.
> 
> So in actuality, it should state that anything that is Aftermarket and not specifically in the Manufacturer's part Database..
> 
> And yes, I do have a vested interest in this.


But you're not competing with your trailer hitch. 

The rules say that for Stock and Street you can only use factory speaker locations. That would be the speaker locations provided by the manufacturer. An aftermarket part that can be installed by your dealer is not a factory offered option. You dealer installing a 3rd party sub and enclosure is not a factory option. It has to be designed and built into the car. For example, my Accord offers a sub on the rear deck. My car doesn't have it but the mounting points and the grill is still there. That's the difference. If Smart doesn't design and build these cars with an option for a sub in the dash then it would be an aftermarket part that is being installed there and illegal in Stock - Mod Street.

I get what you're saying but there is a difference between the car being designed and built with a under dash sub and the dealer installing an aftermarket one in an empty space even if it's with the manufacturer's blessing.


----------



## AccordUno

It was an example..  :laugh:.

But you understand, there needs to be a line drawn before just saying optional item that the dealer needs to install vs a dealer installed item that is aftermarket that is not something the manufacturer intended.


----------



## MacLeod

AccordUno said:


> It was an example..  :laugh:.


Ha! I know but I can't pass up an opportunity to make a lame joke. 



> But you understand, there needs to be a line drawn before just saying optional item that the dealer needs to install vs a dealer installed item that is aftermarket that is not something the manufacturer intended.


Agreed. To me the line would be does the manufacturer install it or the dealer. If it's the manufacturer then it's a factory component. If it's the dealer then it's aftermarket at least as far as SQ classification goes.


----------



## thehatedguy

For warranty purposes, the dealer installed options would be considered stock and covered by the dealership...right?


----------



## Darth SQ

thehatedguy said:


> For warranty purposes, the dealer installed options would be considered stock and covered by the dealership...right?


Yes....absolutely.
But the accessories have to be installed prior to taking delivery of the vehicle.

Here's what I'm going to do.
As many of you know I am in the automotive field performing inspections daily at dealerships all over NorCal.
This coming week, I will stop into one of the Smart Car dealership's parts dept, obtain a factory exploded view of the Smart car dash area and it's equipment, and confirm whether or not there's a front mounted sub and enclosure listed in it.
If there are, this will confirm it is a factory component.
I will also obtain the part #s and post all of it in this thread.
The factory schematic should also confirm if there's a factory pigtail at that location for it or if the factory enclosure and sub come with a factory piggy back wiring harness that would plug into the factory audio system at some point.
This then should clear all the bs up.


Sound good to everyone?


Bret
PPI-ART COLLECTOR


----------



## chefhow

^^^^ let it go. Richard and Linda have, the R&E committee has ruled and it's not going to change its ruling. Let it to already...


----------



## Matt R

I'd like to explain another part of the process that is causing confusion.

The process that happens is, the competitor builds a car, comes to a show in a fairly new area for MECA. The verification judge has to decide what class to put the car in. 
He (Kimo) is not on the R&E committe, therefore didnt get to see the 3-4 months worth of discussions that leads to the rule book changes ect. He has to decide, with fairly little training on MECA rules, what makes each car fall into what class. Thats a fairly difficult job even for a veteran judge. Theere are so many things that can cauase a particular vehicle to be in one class or another. In the time alloted to do this job, it's pretty difficult.

Next problem, MECA is a one man show, run by Steve Stern by himself. The R&E committe is made up of all volunteers who give input and opinions besed on years of experience in judging and competing. We do it 100% because we love it and want to see SQ competition go in a good positive direction. If the competitors involved knew the ruling process and how much care and concern goes into making decisions they would probably appreciate the efforts more. In this situation, the outcome of our decision wasn't relayed in a way that reflects the efforts and thought that went into it. That is very likely why the people involved felt they weren't treated well and caused this uproar.

MECA in general is made up of people that do this for the love and fun of it. There's nothing we want more that people to have fun and enjoy sharing their cars and audio systems with eachother. 

^^^^^ That is the spirit of MECA for those of you that dont know us. We love this too and want everyone to be happy and have a good time. 

If you build your car audio system and it qualifies for Modified class, then compete in that class. You'll be competing against people with similar modifications and hopefully one competitor won't have an advantage over the other. Thats the job of the R&E committe, trying to keep things on an even playing field for good competition.

Matt


----------



## Mic10is

Matt R said:


> I'd like to explain another part of the process that is causing confusion.
> 
> The process that happens is, the competitor builds a car, comes to a show in a fairly new area for MECA. The verification judge has to decide what class to put the car in.
> He (Kimo) is not on the R&E committe, therefore didnt get to see the 3-4 months worth of discussions that leads to the rule book changes ect. He has to decide, with fairly little training on MECA rules, what makes each car fall into what class. Thats a fairly difficult job even for a veteran judge. Theere are so many things that can cauase a particular vehicle to be in one class or another. In the time alloted to do this job, it's pretty difficult.
> 
> Next problem, MECA is a one man show, run by Steve Stern by himself. The R&E committe is made up of all volunteers who give input and opinions besed on years of experience in judging and competing. We do it 100% because we love it and want to see SQ competition go in a good positive direction. If the competitors involved knew the ruling process and how much care and concern goes into making decisions they would probably appreciate the efforts more. In this situation, the outcome of our decision wasn't relayed in a way that reflects the efforts and thought that went into it. That is very likely why the people involved felt they weren't treated well and caused this uproar.
> 
> MECA in general is made up of people that do this for the love and fun of it. There's nothing we want more that people to have fun and enjoy sharing their cars and audio systems with eachother.
> 
> ^^^^^ That is the spirit of MECA for those of you that dont know us. We love this too and want everyone to be happy and have a good time.
> 
> If you build your car audio system and it qualifies for Modified class, then compete in that class. You'll be competing against people with similar modifications and hopefully one competitor won't have an advantage over the other. Thats the job of the R&E committe, trying to keep things on an even playing field for good competition.
> 
> Matt


Well said


----------



## TOOSTUBBORN2FAIL

I still think there needs to be more of a points based system. There are some significant advantages (or disadvantages) in the current rules. A points system would allow a more open approach to building a car, while keeping the cars more equal. 

Obviously, something like a dash rebuild, would put someone at the highest level. But you can't honestly tell me that someone who moves the seat back a couple inches, with an otherwise stock system, has enough of an advantage to be in modex. A points system could fix issues like these.


----------



## Mic10is

TOOSTUBBORN2FAIL said:


> I still think there needs to be more of a points based system. There are some significant advantages (or disadvantages) in the current rules. A points system would allow a more open approach to building a car, while keeping the cars more equal.
> 
> Obviously, something like a dash rebuild, would put someone at the highest level. But you can't honestly tell me that someone who moves the seat back a couple inches, with an otherwise stock system, has enough of an advantage to be in modex. A points system could fix issues like these.


I understand your frustration but you have options.
compete in IASCA or USACI then.

Challenge of MECA is to build within their rules and be successful. 

what you are complaining about is no different than a few competitors who happened to get a job at a manufacturer and were forced to compete in MASTER class bc they worked for a manufacturer.
Both were fairly stock vehicles, that at most would have been in Street Class, but bc they took a job--not even a job working in engineering or R&D or something significant--they had to compete at the Highest Level.

Thats the rule. 

as soon as anyone starts granting exceptions for this and exceptions for that--its a nightmare situation where everyone thinks their individual vase is special and warrants and exception.
remove the precedent or do not create one to create a more level field.


----------



## TOOSTUBBORN2FAIL

Mic, you completely missed my point. I wasn't trying to ***** about the current rules, just expressing my thoughts on a method that might give a more thorough and fair approach to the idea of using each class as a stepping stone to the next. Simply a way to allow more people the freedom to build their car as benefits them in there personal lives, while still keeping competition on a level playing field. Were not talking about giving people exceptions here. 

This is exactly what NASA does with their Time Trials racing, and its very successful. You want to run a certain tire because its your daily driver, well there's a points value for that. Throw a huge engine in? Well there's a points value for that too. Add all the points up, figure out which class that puts you in, and compete. There are very few complaints in NASA about problems like what happened here, because its all very clear, and relatively fair, from a playing field perspective.

Like I said before, and you may have missed, the rules don't mean anything to me personally. I'll never compete in anything less than extreme, and don't care too. Part of that is from watching the rules change from year to year, and part of it is me not wanting to limit what I want to do to my car based on what someone else tells me I can do to be in a certain class. So my suggestion was simply in the interest of making things better for everyone else.


----------



## Mic10is

besides needing more clarification to eliminate as many grey area situations as possible, IMO the MECA class structure works for the majority of competitors.

Its very much what you are describing--you do this amount of modification, you are in this class. you do this amount you are in this class....if u dont want to change out of stock locations, then here are the limits etc....

Its really , in general, pretty simple.


----------



## ErinH

TOOSTUBBORN2FAIL said:


> This is exactly what NASA does with their Time Trials racing, and its very successful. You want to run a certain tire because its your daily driver, well there's a points value for that. Throw a huge engine in? Well there's a points value for that too. Add all the points up, figure out which class that puts you in, and compete. There are very few complaints in NASA about problems like what happened here, because its all very clear, and relatively fair, from a playing field perspective.


I don't ever recall seeing any Apollo missions for time. Talk about expensive! Thats a whole lotta fuel!

Man... What else aren't they telling us!?


----------



## Schizm

bikinpunk said:


> I don't ever recall seeing any Apollo missions for time. Talk about expensive! Thats a whole lotta fuel!
> 
> Man... What else aren't they telling us!?


Imagine having to be the fuel man on pit stops


----------



## MacLeod

I dunno, maybe they can simplify things a little more at least in the lower classes. Modified and up don't seem to have these misunderstandings as often because they're not as restricted. Maybe just base it off speaker locations and be done with it. 

For example, if you surface mount a tweeter on the dash, you cans be in Stock. If you cut a hole and flush mount it you're in ModEx? Wut? 

If you half to cut 1/2 more diameter to the stock speaker opening, you can stay in Street but since I had to cut 3/4", I'm in ModStreet with the same speakers in the same location as the guy in Street. 

You can buy a Dashmat for Street but can't make your own even tho it would be identical until you're in Modified. 

Things like these that make ZERO difference but can trip up competitors could be streamlined. Base it on where your speakers are. Stock uses stock locations and you can use tweeters anywhere including flush mounted in the dash but no processing. Street can use processing. ModStreet gets to add kick panel kids (non vented) and so on. Take all the little things that make no difference but can bump you up a class or 3. A Street car shouldn't be in ModEx because his tweeters are flush mounted or be in Modified because he made his own Dashmat.


----------



## TOOSTUBBORN2FAIL

Those were some of the other examples i was thinking about with the points system that just dont make sense. I brought up seat brackets because it really doesnt give that much of an advantage that a stock vehicle with extended brackets would be anywhere close to competitive in modex. Again, this is a real example of someone who might have been willing to tag along to shows, if he could compete in a class that would at least be fair for him. Its irrelevant for him now, as we've had a falling out and he would be unlikely to compete by himself, but thats just one of those things that had us banging heads on the wall.

Ill stop bringing it up now as i have no dog in this fight. But i do think it would be a mistake to not at least look into a points system for the future. You could even start by taking a look at the way the National Auto Sport Association runs time trials. I think its a much simpler way in the long run to prevent these sorts of things from coming up, and may prevent competitors from leaving.


----------



## AccordUno

Schizm said:


> Imagine having to be the fuel man on pit stops


What you guys never heard of Space Shuttle Door Gunner? That is an actual job in the military..


----------



## spyders03

TOOSTUBBORN2FAIL said:


> Those were some of the other examples i was thinking about with the points system that just dont make sense. I brought up seat brackets because it really doesnt give that much of an advantage that a stock vehicle with extended brackets would be anywhere close to competitive in modex. Again, this is a real example of someone who might have been willing to tag along to shows, if he could compete in a class that would at least be fair for him. Its irrelevant for him now, as we've had a falling out and he would be unlikely to compete by himself, but thats just one of those things that had us banging heads on the wall.
> 
> Ill stop bringing it up now as i have no dog in this fight. But i do think it would be a mistake to not at least look into a points system for the future. You could even start by taking a look at the way the National Auto Sport Association runs time trials. I think its a much simpler way in the long run to prevent these sorts of things from coming up, and may prevent competitors from leaving.



I think MECA does great job with their rules, but something like this may be something to think about. You have some great examples.


----------



## KP

I'd wager that 95% of the competitors out there could clear presets, swap cars with Eldridge and still loose, regardless of class. Compete in the class your car fits in by the rules, speak up when its rule making time again. Its an easy process. Every suggestion (most actually) I have made to MECA do not make it into the rules but just bringing it up gets them thinking.............


----------



## strakele

I think that's pretty true. It seems a lot of people care way too much about what class they're in - feeling like you'll just get destroyed in modified but you'd be competitive in street (for example). Look at the scores at finals. The points differences between classes really aren't that big, and it's not like everyone in the higher classes is there because they have years of experience winning shows. They've just made certain mods to their car that put them there. There are guys with awesome cars and years of competition winning experience in every single class.


----------



## spyders03

AcuraTLSQ said:


> *I'd wager that 95% of the competitors out there could clear presets, swap cars with Eldridge and still loose, regardless of class. *


True story


----------



## Mic10is

AcuraTLSQ said:


> I'd wager that 95% of the competitors out there could clear presets, swap cars with Eldridge and still lose


If I had enough money to buy Mark's car or have him rebuild mine, I'd totally have enough to pay him to tune it as well

But you make a great point


----------



## MacLeod

There is some truth in that. At 2009 finals, me (yes Im bragging  ) and Kirk in Street and then Robert Petty in Modified were in the top 5 or 6 of the entire show despite being in the "lower" classes. From Street to Modified, there isnt that much of a difference in scores. ModEx is when the cars really start to have a significant advantage and pull away so I could understand somebody being pissed off being bumped from Street to ModEx over something trivial but thats about it.

Despite all my bitching about this subwoofer thing, I do think there is way too much drama about the rules lately; theyre not whats keeping you from winning. Trust me, Im 0 for 5 at finals. Nobody has more license to be bitter than me but never once has it been the rules that kept me from winning.....its always been those damned judges that dont appreciate my genius! 

Its never been about the class either. There were finals where I OUTSCORED the winner in the class ABOVE me yet still lost in my class. At the end of the day, its up to you, the competitor, to bring it and win. The rules are the same for everybody and even though I dont agree with all of them and think they could be simplified, theyre not the obstacle some people make them out to be.


----------



## riceboyler

MacLeod said:


> There is some truth in that. At 2009 finals, me (yes Im bragging  ) and Kirk in Street and then Robert Petty in Modified were in the top 5 or 6 of the entire show despite being in the "lower" classes. From Street to Modified, there isnt that much of a difference in scores. ModEx is when the cars really start to have a significant advantage and pull away so I could understand somebody being pissed off being bumped from Street to ModEx over something trivial but thats about it.
> 
> Despite all my bitching about this subwoofer thing, I do think there is way too much drama about the rules lately; theyre not whats keeping you from winning. Trust me, Im 0 for 5 at finals. Nobody has more license to be bitter than me but never once has it been the rules that kept me from winning.....its always been those damned judges that dont appreciate my genius!
> 
> Its never been about the class either. There were finals where I OUTSCORED the winner in the class ABOVE me yet still lost in my class. At the end of the day, its up to you, the competitor, to bring it and win. The rules are the same for everybody and even though I dont agree with all of them and think they could be simplified, theyre not the obstacle some people make them out to be.


As one of those damned judges from way back, I always appreciated the genius, it was the lack of midbass that killed me. 

(Credit to you, you figured me out finally and got the midbass pumpin' near the end of my judging... )


----------



## Navy Chief

What SQL class in everyones opinion does installing an enclosure in the bed of a truck put you in. I would have a cutout in the back wall of the cab for the port. I have already competed in Mod Street this year, and I am thinking I would have to move to Modified at least. Mod street does say you can do what you want behind the "b" pillar, but I think this pushing it. All other equipment would be in the cab.


----------



## strakele

Doing a blowthrough is modex.


----------



## Navy Chief

strakele said:


> Doing a blowthrough is modex.


Damn I was afraid of that, guess I am waiting till next season for that.


----------

