I've watched this go on and on, here, on VMF, and on CC, and I think lots of folks have lost a bit of perspective, especially GT2K and Historic here.
to GT2K: While you may not approve of some of the stuff Historic says, even your own analysis of his setup, with your "old school and proven" and "there are better choices" comments, acknowledges that much of what he has done is functional and "proven". And while you may criticize certain aspects of his setup as questionable, ultimately, the evidence for or against those aspects is in the reality of their effectiveness and safety, not in suppositions or prejudice.
Therefor, assuming some questionable part of his setup actually works (work with me here for a sec), like the Lowes plastic lowering blocks, then the only real concern is safety. This is where Historic's only evidence is that he isn't dead yet. He doesn't have any numbers about the density or structural integrity of the component and he is using it for a purpose that it was not designed for. If this is your concern about any of his mods, then I agree. This should be a concern everybody, including Historic.
to Historic: I appreciate your approach of building a competitive car on a budget. However, even you must admit that higher end components from TCP, GlobalWest, Griggs, or whoever, may (and probably do) offer more performance potential. Don't knock 'em and say they aren't functional or they aren't necessary. They are, and they may be. Its probably just best to admit that you don't need them for what you're trying to accomplish.
You should also acknowledge concerns about safety and be a bit more vigilant. Safety is not a matter of best guess ("uh, this looks like it could work...") and rolling the dice ("...and its seems hard enough"), but rather using good engineering and testing approaches ("the component should be this size, must have these specs, and it meets these pressure tests"). We are at such a point in technological development that if you are serious about what you do, there is technology available to help develop and analyze components fairly inexpensively (if not downright cheap). Like the Lowes blocks you've gotten hassled for... you should be able to contact the manufacturer and get the specs, thus giving you data that you can use to make calculations. Put them in one of the computer programs available for estimating structural integrity and you'll have a better defined idea of their limits and safety. If the specs meet the function intended, then its an ok choice, right? If not, back to the drawing board.
to Everybody: Lets keep some perspective... Components just have to function and perform correctly, while being safe; it doesn't matter where they came from or how they're built. The Lowes blocks might be ok if they're functional and safe. Cutting springs isn't, in itself, wrong to do, even 2.5". As long as they function correctly, don't make the car unsafe or unpredictable, and the car performs the way the driver needs, it doesn't matter what the spring rate is, does it? The question becomes: is it specs come before function, or does function come before specs? In my opinion, specs (i.e. spring rate, sway bar diameter, structural integrity of lowering blocks) should be determined by the function it will serve. If stiffer springs are needed, it doesn't matter if they're 1000lb/in, even if that sounds insane. If that is what is needed, then that is what is should be used.
And don't forget that racers and backyard mechanics have created components from parts bins and hardware stores since day 1, using stuff for things for purposes they weren't originally designed for, and built some effective, functional, and safe vehicles. Billet, stainless, extruded, etc. hasn't always been available, but still cars got built and driven. The aftermarket supply of well designed parts and components hasn't always been so good, which meant if folks wanted/needed something, they built it from what they had or designed something
new . Imagine that...
All of that said, I do think it is important to acknowledge that stuff from TCP, GW, Griggs, Cobra Automotive, etc., is great stuff, built out of the desire for better (design and material) components. I also think that we should choose to benefit from this stuff if it fits our needs and budgets. However, it is equally important to acknowledge that while that stuff is available, our own needs/desires may be able to be satisfied without them. Do I really
need tubular control arms, or the perfect ball joint angle, or rollerize spring perches, or rack&pinion steering? Maybe, maybe not. I can imagine circumstances for both. And if I do need them, should I necessarily get them from those folks if I can build something functional and safe for less? Ever heard of home brewed rollerized perches, or rack&pinion, or boxed lowers, or tubular strut rods? Yep...
Keep some perspective, quit raining on other peoples' parades, offer some good constructive feedback, and keep the insults and chastising out of it. And realize, if you do otherwise, you will alienate people and damage what little integrity you can have over the internet. And if that doesn't matter to you, do the rest of us a favor and stay off the internet entirely...
you could start by looking at his finishes (last, 2nd to last, 4th in a field of 4, etc.) I'll give him credit for fielding a car in a VERY challenging class (but uh circle track? not exactly how I would describe AIX). He just told you to use a piece of plastic from Lowes between your rearend and leafsprings 
are YOU getting it yet?
Later.
