autox
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: AM Turnout (was Fine print)

To: <Andrew_Bettencourt@kingston.com>, "Larry R. Metz" <lrmetz@home.com>
Subject: Re: AM Turnout (was Fine print)
From: "Jay Mitchell" <jemitchell@compuserve.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 08:59:23 -0600
Andy wrote:

>The Snipester touched on why AM is losing members.  The cost of
entry is
>WAY to high.  The monsters that are being built now (Phantom,
Dragon) are
>hand built from the ground up with thousands of engineering
hours into
>them.

I don't take issue with the premise, but I have to ask if, once
the R&D outlay is made - as it was by Messrs. cheng and Milligan
(and others whose names I don't know), if it really costs six
figures to duplicate (approximately) a car like the Phantom.

>  Yes it's fun to build something unlimited; but to do so and
get
>beaten by 5+ seconds at Nationals?  What is the incentive to
race against
>one of these machines?

Again, I can't argue the drop in subscription to the class, but
I'd say the motivation to come back would be to see how much of
that five seconds could be made up within a given available
budget/prep time.

>As far as the karts, there are not in the same league as AM -

Keerect. I don't think karts are a factor in AM participation.

One problem with AM is that there is no real possibility of
consolidating the class with something else, for obvious reasons.
Ergo, the only option is elimination of the class. I agree with
those who say no exceptions should be made wrt the National
status of the class, but it would be a shame to see it disappear.

Jay


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