autox
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: New car classifications

To: Tom Gentry <tgentry@execpc.com>
Subject: Re: New car classifications
From: Joshua Hadler <jhadler@rmi.net>
Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 14:19:39 -0700
Tom Gentry wrote:
> 
> >>the 99+ Cobra Mustang in FS and ESP on a separate line.  No IRS 
>update/backdate.  <<
> 
> While I understand what being on a seperate line means to me, no 
>update/backdate, I really don't understand the rationale.  My car's chassis is 
>virtually identical to a 99, they're both in FS and ESP, the IRS is supposed 
>to be a bolt on, etc.  It seems instead of keeping costs down SCCA is trying 
>to force more new car purchases.
> 
> Mustangs aside, it just seems that updates/backdates should be allowed within 
>a class, 
> especially when they are bolt ons.
> 
> If the IRS proves to be worthless that means the 99 Cobra's won't have the 
>ability to put in 
> the live axle either.

        While I feel that the IRS mustang should be allowed to donate its
suspension to the otherwise identical 99's, I also see the reason why it
wasn't classed that way. The potential of the IRS mustang is unknown,
certainly in SP trim to be sure. I would guess that the concern was
somehow making a sudden overdog and throwing off the balance of the
class. I'm not in ESP, and don't have a dog in this fight, but I guess I
can see why it was classed as such. As for why the IRS mustang is in
F-Stock and the Camaro SS is in Super-Stock, that's a horse (er, pony)
of a different color.

-Josh2

-- 
Joshua Hadler    '74 914 2.0 CSP/Bi - Hooligan Racing #29 - CONIVOR
                 '87 Quantum Syncro - aka stealth quattro

jhadler@rmi.net
http://rainbow.rmi.net/~jhadler/

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>