autox
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: STU Rules Update Update

To: Pat MacAvoy <patmac@tridelta.com>, autox@autox.team.net,
Subject: Re: STU Rules Update Update
From: Brian M Kennedy <kennedy@i2.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Jul 1999 16:14:08 -0500
At 02:37 PM 7/16/99 , Pat MacAvoy wrote:
>> From: Brian M Kennedy <kennedy@i2.com>
>> 
>> At 09:36 AM 7/16/99 , Pat MacAvoy wrote:
>> 
>> >Now I think this pretty well sums up what is wrong with this concept.
>> >  IMHO, a civic won't keep up with supercharged M3 (951, etc.), nor will a
>> DSM.
>> 
>> Well, CSP M3's are regularly stomped by CSP Civics.
>
>And CSP M3s routinely beat civics.  Your point?

That M3s and Civics *are* competitive once you've prepared them
both to SP rules.  Given the proposed STU just allows a few more
mods, I see no reason to believe your statement above is correct...
a STU Civic will keep up with a supercharged M3.

In fact, one step further... the more mods you allow, the more the
Civic can catch up with the M3 component-wise... but the M3 will
always be much heavier... thus, if anything, I'd expect the M3
will be the one having trouble keeping up with the Civics.

>
>> Why do you think supercharging gives M3's a bigger advantage than Civics?
>> Especially when engine swaps are allowed... which would be a useless option
>> for an M3.
>> 
>But with the suspension opened up to a greater level than SP rules (that
>  is my recollection), the M3 might be able to gain on the civic.  My 
>  recollection is that BMWs can't be lowered much due to camber changes.
>  But with suspension largely being free....

Actually, SP rules allow pretty much anything you'd want to do to your
M3 suspension-wise.  And the camber-hungry M3 is not limited in
lowering due to any camber issues.  But we are digressing...

Cheers,

Brian




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