autox
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Fiero classing

To: "David Hawkins" <otgrouch@twosrus.com>
Subject: Re: Fiero classing
From: Andrew_Bettencourt@kingston.com
Date: Thu, 13 Jul 2000 06:44:41 -0700

But the point remains:  a whole class worth of difference?  I don't think so.
The ES car on the other hand may need revisiting.  For what its worth, I have
seen MAYBE one letter with action requested on a 4cyl Fiero so the letter
writing campaign someone spoke of apparently never got off the ground.

AB
First Solo car:  1987 Fiero GT
Second Solo car:  1988 Fiero Formula




"David Hawkins" <otgrouch@twosrus.com> on 07/13/2000 10:10:28 AM

Please respond to "David Hawkins" <otgrouch@twosrus.com>

To:   "Scott Meyers" <solo2@uswest.net>, "George Ryan" <quad4fiero@webzone.net>
cc:   autox@autox.team.net (bcc: Andrew Bettencourt/FIELD SALES/Kingston)

Subject:  Re: Fiero classing




>> In reference to SCCA classing the Fiero, they have not only mis-
>> classed the CS 2800lb 140hp Fiero,
>
>The MR-2 is 2650# and 135 HP.
>
>Both are mid engine.
>
>Are they really that different mechanically?
>
>It seems 5hp and 150# is not statistically significant in the grand scope
of
>classing.

I think Mr. Ryan would be much more happy with a 5 speed in his Fiero.  I've
run against V6 Fieros that were pretty closely matched to the NA MR2.  It
takes a VERY good driver to wring the best performance out of the Fiero,
though.

The Fiero is a porker, no doubt....but so is the MR2.  You want to compare
numbers?  How about we call the Fiero what it really is....2800lbs,
170lb-ft.
Mr2?  2650, 145lb-ft.   Which makes a bigger difference on the autox course?

David Hawkins
86 MR2 CSP in pieces
Son to Ron Hawkins, 86 Fiero GT








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