Loren Williams <Loren@kscable.com> wrote:
> Dan Gamble wrote:
> Even though for the most part, SP has nothing to do with street.
Says who? My SP Talon is driven to work every day. We trailer the car to big
events because it's the best way to get 2 people and a ton of support crap a
long distance - ever try to carry two sets of race tires in a Talon?
> That's right, ST (and STR) are intended for street driven cars with
> common bolt-on mods. STU...
Is the same thing, only more so.
> I won't even get into that, it tends to take over a discussion.
Hey! For the record, at the SEB town hall on Monday, I waited until it was
obvious that nobody else wanted to speak before launching into the STU Circus. I
was fully prepared and willing to wait until all of the "real" Stock and SP
issues had been discussed.
And it's hardly my fault that, once broached, STU was all anyone wanted to talk
about. :)
It was interesting to see how many different opinions there are on what ST/STU
is "supposed" to be. It was especially suprising to hear Mark and Vince opine
that ST is supposed to be "Street Prepared Cheap" instead of "Riceboy Prepared"
> I'm bucking to be the next Dennis Grant of ST.
Uhh, as in "the hardworking co-ordinator od the Team.Net STU proposal" or as in
"the longwinded bastard who won't shut the hell up"?
:)
> The winning tire in the class was the Pilot SX. Aside from being
> obscenely expensive ($179-$229)
Hold that thought...
> Now, I agree that part of the purpose of ST is to give newbies a
> competitive place to play with their tricked out street cars fresh off
> the street.
NO. I do NOT agree with this. ST/STU is a class for enthusiasts with highly
prepared, street driven, small-displacement sports coupes/sedans typical of the
"Sport Compact Car" or "Import Drag" demographic. "ST" does not imply "newbie",
nor does it imply "people who won't swap wheels at events"
Riceboys are not stupid. They realize - just like everyone else - that autocross
chews up tires. Regularly competing in autox implies a second set of
wheels/tires dedicated to competition use. Doing well implies that those
competition-use-only tires be grippy, which normally implies "soft" and "short
wearing" and quite possibly "shaved".
Getting those qualities out of a non-R compound tire costs big bucks. Ask Mark.
> But I believe it also has a secondary purpose, [snip]...
> ... That is, to allow people like myself and most of the other Nationals ST
> class, who actually LIKE to compete on our street tires a place to
> compete in our daily drivers without spending a lot of money.
In my opinion, the goals of "competing on your daily street tires" and "winning"
are mutually exclusive. Two different kinds of tire for two different purposes.
That's not to say there's no place for a street tire class. It makes no sense to
require the occasional participant (less than 5 events per season, say) to have
a second set of expensive race tires they hardly ever use. Regional street tire
classes make a ton of sense. But National competitors are NOT occasional
competitors by definition.
> That last part is important. ST needs to remain inexpensive.
I do agree that there is a place for the Riceboy demographic that's halfway to
the full-on (happy!) lunacy of STU. One might argue that that place is Street
Prepared, but there are those that see SP as still "too prepared"
It's tough to make everyone happy.
DG
|