autox
[Top] [All Lists]

STU Proposal Update - Displacement limits feedback required

To: autox@autox.team.net, werace4u@aol.com
Subject: STU Proposal Update - Displacement limits feedback required
From: dg50@daimlerchrysler.com
Date: Mon, 19 Jul 1999 10:25:49 -0400
OK, I've read through all the STU-related posts from the weekend, and it looks
like we're down to two major items to solve:

1) Language for engine swaps (what is/is not allowed)
2) Displacement limits

For Item 1, someone is sending me the language that ProRally uses (they have a
similar concept) and I want to see how they've worded their rule. If it's good,
I may just steal it. :)

For item 2, we have two good solutions. Either one is completely workable, the
difference is which cars get included/excluded depending on which one we adopt.

Proposal A is:

Rotary : 1.500 litres
OHC    : 3.000 litres
Pushrod: 4.000 litres
No allowence for induction type

Proposal B is:

Rotary:                   : 1.400 litres
Forced induction          : 2.200 litres
OHC normally aspirated    : 3.200 litres
Pushrod normally aspirated: 4.000 litres

The Pros and Cons as I see them are:

Proposal A
   Pro
     - allows for maximum range of engine combos
     - allows more cars (Grand Prix, etc.)
     - slightly simpler
   Con
     - top cars will probably need forced induction
     - favours larger engines
     - may allow a couple of potential "overdog" cars (Porsches)

Proposal B
   Pro
     - might be possible to build a non-turbo top car
     - smaller turbos more competitive
     - excludes a couple of potential "overdog" cars
   Con
     - excludes some target cars (Grand Prix, M3, Subaru WRX)
     - smaller audience
     - less engine choice

My personal inclination is to do "B", but bump the turbo limit to 2.4 to allow
the Suburu (I think it's 2.4 - I'll check tonight)

Let's put it to a vote - lemme know what y'all think is better.

DG




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