I disagree. You sort of make the counter-point in your text. If the CSP
Civic isn't even the car for the class anymore, then it should be easier
for one to dominate that PAX number. Go to full race cams, full head work,
bump in compression, etc. Grab the extra ponies and lower the PAX. It
really is contrary to logic.
I think that some 'fudge factor' must be used when developing a number for
a new class. The cars are not fully developed and you must err on the side
of caution as cars are only going to get better by leaps and bounds, not by
baby steps like in the SS example.
Just my $.02 - well, maybe a nickel.
AB
"Kent Rafferty" <gs96@sgi.net>@autox.team.net on 01/16/2001 03:17:08 PM
Please respond to "Kent Rafferty" <gs96@sgi.net>
Sent by: owner-autox@autox.team.net
To: "Team.Net" <autox@autox.team.net>
cc:
Subject: Re: 2001 PAX Index - Sirota - go to work!
In Beck's defense, the quickest SM-legal car right now
is probably a CSP Civic or BSP M3. The M3 was moved
from C/SP because it wasn't believed to be competitive
with the top CSP cars. The Civic hasn't won CSP in
years. So, the quickest SM-legal cars are apparently
slower than the best CSP cars. That's exactly where the
PAX and the RTP indices put SM.
Of course one can argue that a theoretically
SM-modified Civic or whatever will be faster than the
top CSP cars because it can have a supercharger or
turbocharger or whatever, but it's VERY hard to
quantify that potential improvement and we'd be
speculating at this point. In the same rationale,
should the 2001 SS PAX be revised because the Z06
*appears* to be a theoretical killer on paper? How
about the B/SP PAX? Shouldn't that be revised given the
potential of an SP Z06?
Kent Rafferty
SM Supra
Mark opined:
> P.S. Both systems have made the clear and obvious
mistake of rating SM slower than CSP. I thought we
fixed all that last year...
|