<deep breath>
Let's take your BMW example. Many people have stated that there isn't a class
worth of difference between the 1.6l Miata and the 1.8 or Sport version in 1999.
If that is the case then you could, for arguments sake, say that BS and CS were
VERY similar in performance potential. What difference would it make what class
your new BMW goes into? BS or CS run near identical times yet it doesn't fit
the character of the class as the current SCAC/SEB group have designed.
AFFORDABLE and fun with similar performance.
I think it is a good idea for the membership to have a class like this.
Somewhere a competitor can go to have a fun and quick car without having to
break the bank. If ya'll don't like this sort of philosophy, write a letter.
The tides can change if there are enough waves.
AB
"Paul Foster" <pfoster@gdi.net> on 07/14/2000 11:08:52 AM
Please respond to "Paul Foster" <pfoster@gdi.net>
To: "team.net" <autox@autox.team.net>
cc: (bcc: Andrew Bettencourt/FIELD SALES/Kingston)
Subject: Re: More Fiero - CS and Miata 1.6l
<<<OK, let's also stop comparing the Miata 1.6 --> 1.8 situation to
the Fiero 1985
through 1987 --> 1988. The Miata 1.6 was not moved because there was
a large
contingent of people asking for it. It was not moved because there
was a
'classes' worth of difference between the two. And it certainly
wasn't moved
because Mazda pays well in the contingency arena. (Before Mr. Foster
claims as
much)>>>
Little old moi? :)
<<<It was moved to keep CS "fresh". The class has been designed to be
an
affordable sports car class. As the Fiero, 924S and MR2 all age,
decent
examples get increasingly hard to find. Parts become scarce and
reliability
suffers. The inclusion of the 1.6l versions was to infuse a car that
was
plentiful, built in large numbers, and fit the performance parameters
of the
class as well as the basic philosophy of the class. As the prices on
those cars
dropped, it became a solution based on the CLASSES needs, not the CARS
needs.>>>
You don't appear to be classing cars based on relative autocross
potential anymore, but more on some sort of demographic approach
coupled with value judgement. So if BMW made a sports car that cost
$40K but otherwise fit the performance criteria for this class you
would put it in AS or BS instead where it would not be competitive?
Sorry, but I just don't get it. I simply don't think there are enough
classes for this sort of gerrymandering. Class cars based on relative
performance and not on which wheels are driven or how much they cost.
Paul Foster
|