Gary
I do see your point, my idea however has to do with the fact that around
here we have a lot of the previously mentioned 2 seaters driven by the
folks that SCCA seems to be trying to attract.
Currently, there is no place in the ST prep arena for the cars.It seems to
me if your trying to attract a different segment of drivers then don't
narrow or limit vehicle eligibility.
I imagine there are a lot of drivers who can't afford the new generation of
4 seaters but could the others, especially some of the older cars.
Some local high school kids have been to our events & have said that no way
could they afford the newer cars. But they might be able to "dig up"
something in the 2 seater variety.
Also, why target a certain age group? There might be parents (racing or
not) who might want to get their offspring involved, like the ST concept
but are not able or about to be able to get the newer 4 seaters. They also
want something to be able to work with their kids on, and 2 seaters expand
to all kinds of possibilities.
Our ST like local class has been lots of fun to be in & our drivers run
mostly 2 seater cars. Somewhere there's gotta be a
solution.....Affordability is a factor.
my .03 1/2C
Judy {:>}
At 10:26 AM 9/15/99 PDT, GARY MCDANIEL wrote:
>My $.02,
>Consider the concept of ST. I think it was intended to attract the many sport
>compact types that are running around all of our area streets. The likes of
>which include CIVICS, INTEGRAS and other small sedan/coupe type cars.
Allowing
>design specific "sports cars" should not happen. They have their place. I
>think SCCA has created a terrific new place to play for the many who have not
>discovered our kind of fun.
>GaryMc
>
>I agree with the ST concept I just want to see eligible vehicle group
>expanded.
>
>Judy in San Diego {:>}
>
>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
>Get free email and a permanent address at http://www.netaddress.com/?N=1
>
>
|