This thread isn't stirring up a lot of interest, but I'm still interested,
so here goes:
Mark Todd said:
>richard nicholls wrote:
(PS -- that's the CCaannaaddiiaann spelling of "Nichols" <grin>.)
>
>>...the SVO in SP legal trim *even under the proposed new
>>rule* can make more power than I can use in autoxing.
I was really making a personal note about autox in general and my
still-developing skill level. I doubt I could beat a lighter car with less
horsepower -- the Miata comes to mind (had a ride in one driven by an "A"
class driver (scary fast) -- with the power I have, much less more.
Legislating against turbocars in ESP/FSP doesn't make sense if it isn't HP
that wins autoxes.
BTW (does anyone really *read* these posts word-for-word like I do?) I
progressed from "I can't go any faster on max boost than I can on low boost,
why bother?" to "Wow, I *can* go faster on max boost!", just on the strength
of the pro instruction I got from that Miata driver regarding "point &
squirt" technique. I'm talking a span of time that amounted to *minutes*
for that progress to occur.
>I'd love to see you build such an animal as you describe.
>As soon as people start doing this and the SVO dominates
>whichever class it's currently in -- reclass it!
The SVO, driven by anyone who is likely to compete in 1999's autox season,
is in no danger of dominating any class in autox. Especially not when
people on this List talk about buying cars specifically for autoxing (my
autox use of the SVO is incidental, literally, to my purchase of it used, as
a street car). But I'll have fun trying!
>>But is it *right* to impose an exhaust limitation on
>>turbocars that aren't imposed on supercharged or n/a
>>cars? No to that.
>
>Exactly. The SCCA's mindset would be to punish all turbo
>cars because you built yourself a bomb, rather than just
>moving you to BSP/ASP/whatever.
Hey, whose side are you on -- I personally can't compete with those guys!
<grin> Actually, before anyone gets upset about this comment of mine,
personally I gauge my times against the Vettes anyway, so I already
"compete" with among the very fastest cars.
>I spent MONTHS designing and building a turbo outlet and
>downpipe for my car - specifically designed to help control
>boost creep. Many more months have been spent trying to
>devise more legal exhaust system changes to control creep.
>All those brain cells could have been spent much better on
>gaining raw HP in EMod. This is where I am at this point.
Since it's legal to have boost creep that is incidental to legal mods, I
don't understand why you did this. But I respect that you felt it was the
"right thing to do", and hopefully others would on this List would agree
with this view.
>I have given up any national aspirations. I have not renewed
>my SCCA membership. I will now have FUN with my car in
>EMod without having to worry about rules. It's liberating.
I can respect that feeling, too. I explored CP thinking I would get that
liberation, too, but legal turbocars have more freedom in SP than they do in
Prepared (even though Prepared cars don't even have to have *windows* --
those things are *heavy*!), which I don't understand (but surely someone on
the List will "explain" it to me).
Sounds like you are indeed competing an SVO, Mark. If so, I'd like to talk
to you more about that, -- nationwide we can easily field enough cars to
comprise a Team SVO (TSVO, seriously). I'm already a founding member of
TSOL (self-explanatory acronym, if you think about it) because I insist on
using street tires in SP.
Richard Nichols
rnichol1@san.rr.com
86 Mustang SVO TII 1C: ESP/FSP/?
Founding Member TSOL, TSVO
72 Pinto Sedan 2.0 3J - Original Owner, Restored
On display at the San Diego Automotive Museum,
June 99 through January 00
|