Don't get me wrong, I don't like the idea either. But if it means another racer participating, it's okay by me.
Then leave it to the club/track/race director's discretion. Sure allow it to race to "fill the field" but if it becomes an issue it's easy to say "no".
Certainly my choice of the word "legal" was unfortunate.
Here are some features of a a new "pan" car from a European manufacturer:
uses the same front uprights, rear uprights, pivot balls, stub axles, layshaft, and half-shafts as their suspension car; and has adjustable camber, toe and front caster. It is legal.
Not really the case, at either end of the car. First of all most of the current cars are "purpose built" and use very few of the parts from suspension cars. In fact, not all manufacturers of pans even make suspension cars. Motonica uses parts from a 4wd pan car in some versions of their 2wd but had to beef up the front end and I believe the parts are now different. I have examined four or five different models of the modern "Classic" pan cars and they are nothing like a locked out suspension car in execution.
The difference is in the attachment of the axles to the pan. In the rear, none of the cars I am aware of have any flex, movement, between the center of the axle and the ends where the wheels mount. Everything is very solid. Of course adjustments can be made but, when running on the track the new cars are very similar to the vintage pans. In the front, things get a little tricky. 
(I will say that I am not convinced the front end is the best solution for a true "pan" car, but the cat's out of the bag and I believe it's too late to go back to a vintage type pan car front and outlaw nearly all of the modern "Classic" chassis in the field or on the market.)
If you look at an RC 300 with the plastic front end pieces, since they are attached to the main chassis pan, they in effect are "independently suspended". I believe the stiffness of the .125" G-10 chassis pan minimizes this to a negligible amount.
Now mill the area between the parts to .062" and the flex increases. Could this have been a design feature of why Associated went to the separate pieces in place of a beam axle?
The articulated movement about the centerline of the Classic Pan car's front axle is not generally "independent" in most designs since the left and right front wheels are attached with a beam., when one side moves so does the other. The DFX has an Associated style front end where the stiffness of the mounting plate can allow independent movement each front wheel. Again, since the DFX is a production car and legal where there are pan car rules, I don't see how a few US racers can outlaw it's design which must be legal under the rules where the class was developed and raced. (Some talk of allowing this and that to gain a racer or two, what would be the effect of not allowing factory built cars because we don't agree with the rules the are built to meet?).
(I won't comment on the new WRC EVO as I have not seen the car in person and cannot determine the details of it's design. I have seen posts on European a Forum that indicates that there is concern about some aspect of the design meeting the rules. I am confident that things will be worked out, 'cause it'll cost me if they aren't!! 
)
Here are some features of a locked-suspension car: uses the same front uprights, rear uprights, pivot balls, stub axles, layshaft, and half-shafts as the suspension car; and has adjustable camber, toe and front caster. But it's not legal?
I'm interested to hear your thoughts on why a locked car should not be allowed.
It all comes down to flex across the axles. A "pan" car can have unlimited flex OF THE CHASSIS PAN (until it hits the ground) when loaded between the axles, but essentially "ZERO" when loaded on the chassis centerline and axle centerline.
Although I was not actively involved with 1/8 on-road at the time suspension cars with locked shocks were used, here are two comments from this thread on the subject:
P2gee
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dasmopar
Chassis : Any 1/8 scale pan chassis with no shocks nitro powered car.
I think you need to be very very clear what a "pan chassis" is and what "shocks" are in the rules. These two items where part of the demise of the last pan classes run in this country.
Rick Davis
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taylorm
......I say a "shock" can be used if it's used 1/12th style .............ie. controlling the spring in a chassis /tbar..but no shocks used in conjunction with an arm moving on a pivot pin.............
Think you guys may have missed the point here - if memory serves correctly P2Gee may be referencing the era when guys were locking up the shocks on suspension cars and calling them pan cars - need to prevent that.
I defer to these and other such comments.
Please don't read anything into this that isn't intended; I'm not trying to provoke anyone. The reason I ask is because there may be a very valid reason why the locked car should not be allowed, and at the moment I'm unaware of it.