I had planned to stay out of this, but since you insist. The Supra in queston
trophied with a cone on every single run. That statement should stand on its
own. However, lest you think it was all driver, the rest of us who trophied in
ESP would dis agree, and everyone I know of would agree that John Ames is not a
poor driver. Jamye Abersold is a good driver, but not that much better than
everyone else.
My personal opinon since you did not ask, is that the cars should be re-classed.
However your argument has as many or more holes in it than the one you are
arguing against. The top four cars in ESP were prepared to the max. Well ok
John's Mustang was not engine wise, but was suspension wise. The others are
however. You seem to say that we should leave the turbo's alone since most of
them are not prepared to the max. Gee that is a great idea, let some one run
away with a class so that everyone else does not have to change thier car to the
max.
The SCCA has always tried to class cars to the max performance they are capable
of, to eliminate ringers.
Sometimes they are successful and sometimes not. This does not mean they should
quit trying.
Again I am with re-classing a car to its potential. Send the Supra to BSP,
Scotty is waiting.
Rob
David Hawkins wrote:
> >Here's a question I have for the SEB and anyone else who cares to comment:
> >where's the evidence of a problem with turbo cars? Who can produce hard,
> >statistical numbers that show that turbo cars are dominating Street
> Prepared?
> >
> >In order to fix a problem, one must first show that there is a problem to
> fix.
>
> Every time I ask this question, I get the same answer....it all points to
> ONE
> particular ESP Supra that supposedly is putting down close to 400HP. I
> have to ask how far this is off of the HP put out by the pony cars in ESP.
> Considering that the Supra and F body cars are about equal in HP in stock
> form, and the Supra is a porker of a car from the factory, I have to wonder
> about the true disparity when both cars are taken TO THE FULL EXTENT OF
> THE RULES.
>
> It seems that we have a single vehicle making people think twice about a
> whole
> breed. The actions taken to limit this one car are affecting a LOT of other
> cars
> that are either non-competitive or marginally so as it is. Granted, most of
> the
> other ones aren't built to the full extent, and we can't really judge until
> they are.
> That being the case, instead of trying to fix a problem that really doesn't
> exist,
> why not just boot the offending car to a higher class (BSP? Corvettes weigh
> about the same as a Supra and have about the same power....ASP? The Supra
> will have more power than some of the others, but it has a weight penalty
> also).
> Fuel Cut (yes, that's going to be a sore point with me for all time) and
> exhaust
> are NOT making fire breathing class overdogs out of EVERY turbo car. Let's
> reclass the ones that are, and get on with it.
>
> Sorry if pointing out one particular car seems in poor taste, but in every
> instance
> that I have mentioned Fuel Cut or Toyota ECU boost limiters or the whole
> turbo
> thing...I get the same reply - 'do you think that XXXXX's Supra is legal?'
> 'XXXX's
> Supra is built to the extent and is taking the class' etc etc. All roads
> lead to one
> item, that item is usually what you need to dwell on.
>
> David Hawkins
> 93 Mr2 Turbo ASP retired
> 85 Mr2 ITA/CSP
> TLS #15
|