Howdy,
On Thu, 17 Jun 1999, Mark Sirota wrote:
> Why is there an ACR package, and a massive contingency package, if they
> won't last when they're raced? Take some of the money out of the
> contingency budget to pay for the TSB, if necessary.
Yeah, _that'll_ sure help the autocrosser. "Well, we're only paying you
half the money we used to so that you can change that front motor mount."
Not to mention that if they issue a TSB they get potentially negative
publicity.
So basically we end up hassling one of the manufactureres that's tried to
help us.
Sure. That's better than just writing one sentance in a rule book that
allows changing the front motor mount to an alternate one.
> If Chrysler was participating directly in the series, they would do
> what was necessary to help their cars finish the race. Why won't they
> do that for privateers?
>
> I still say this is a Chrysler problem, not an SCCA problem.
Chrysler participates in racing to promotre the sales of the street cars.
They aren't gonna comprimise those street cars simply to make it so a $50
part doesn't have to be replaced once a month. Not to mention that the
model has ended and they have no desire (probably) to support it much
more.
Why must we take the difficult approach when we, the club representing the
people in question, could just allow it ourselves?
Mark
|