Eric,
I think you are onto something. We could then just have two classes CH and
NCH (Cup Holders and No Cup Holders).
Of course knowing the way things work after a few years there would be class
fragmentation with 1CH 2CH 3CH 4CH ( One Cup Holder, Two Cup Holders, etc)
and NCH-NGB NCH-NAC NCH-NMP ( No Cup Holders - No Glove Box, No Cup
Holders - No AC, No Cup Holders - No Map Pockets) Then some wiseguy like
Dennis Grant will need a class to run his non-stock 5 Cup Holder car and
we'll end up with CHM (Cup Holder Modified).
On second thought, Eric, keep your ideas to yourself :-)
Regards,
Alan "grocery getter" Pozner
----- Original Message -----
From: Eric Salem <eric@mail.brown911.com>
To: <autox@autox.team.net>
Sent: Saturday, April 07, 2001 8:09 PM
Subject: RE: "new" scca logo - proposal
> Here's an idea:
>
> Let's break all SCCA memberships into two catagories. Your participating
> category must be clearly stated on your person and on your car. These
> catagories would be Cupholder Cars and Pre-Cupholder Cars.
>
> e
> One with, one without
> (What good is cupholder if it can't keep that 12-ounce can from spilling
in
> a hard turn.)
>
>
>
> >Date: Sat, 7 Apr 2001 10:55:31 -0500
> >From: "George Ryan" <quad4fiero@webzone.net>
> >Subject: Re: "new" scca logo
> >
> >Why a poll? I was just stating that Mr. Davison was quoting from an SCCA
> >source, and the info (as usual) was tainted and false.
>
> Here, verbatim, is the only thing from that article you could be referring
> to:
>
> 'The original wire wheel is based on the classic Rudge wire wheel found on
> many classic sports cars of the 1920s and 30s. The Sports Car Club of
> America was founded to preserve and maintain classic sporting cars from
the
> vintage era and has become the nation's largest sports car organization
with
> races, rallies and solo events staged around the country'
>
> How is that tainted or false? He said the club was FOUNDED to
> preserve/maintain the relics, and has BECOME the largest sports car
> organization. NOWHERE in there does it say that there will always be a
> place to take obselete machinery and be competitive. In fact, there was
> nothing stated about racing dinosaurs at all. What the hell does racing
> have to do with preserving and maintaining classic sports cars? And just
> because the club was founded to do that, there is nothing to prevent the
> club's focus from changing, as it has. Don't get me wrong--I have a great
> appreciation for classic sports cars, but your perspective is skewed from
> reality.
>
> >So what do you think a "poll" would accomplish? Are you looking for a
> >demographic base? Seems that the grocery getters would win, since the
> >classing structure favors them, that is what the majority have bought in
> >order to be competitive. So in that light, I yield.
>
> Your logic is, for lack of a better word, crap. The majority of
> autocrossers out there autocross cars that can be reliably street driven
> because the cars serve a dual purpose. THAT is why they drive modern,
> reliable, comfortable 'grocery getters', not that mean, evil, unfair
> classing scheme.
>
> >It still does not preclude the fact that the SCCA has intentionally
turned
> >their backs on their roots, and those roots are the sports cars, much as
> >their name implies.
>
> How so? Sports cars, even those of vintage variety, still compete in
nearly
> all of the SCCA's competitive venues.
>
> >The solution would be to re-structure so that the older cars have a place
> >to
> >play that they CAN be competitive as well as the newer cars, not
structure
> >so they have to play together (where the newer grocery getters DO have
the
> >advantage, in most cases).
>
> Hmmm...sounds like you want to make a slew of under-subscribed classes?
> Yeah, that's definitely the solution. It seems to me that there are many
> marque clubs and vintage organizations that do exactly this. If you need
to
> be part of an organization that makes it so that the old cars always get
to
> win, maybe looking there would be better for you.
>
> >Or better yet, score and time the driver, and not the car. Of course,
that
> >would take some forward thinking. And your club is incapable of doing
that.
>
> Seems to me this is already done to some extent with the PAX and RTP
> indexes. I guess the problem there is those indexes are based on the
evil,
> biased classing structure, though, eh? What you want to see, the
protection
> of old cars that fell from favor with mainstream auto enthusiasts, is far
> from forward thinking, so who are you to accuse?
>
> The SCCA may have faults, but it provides me with a venue to enjoy
> motorsports that is not out of reach financially. An overt attack on the
> SCCA with no logical basis truly angers me.
>
> -dave
>
> _________________________________________________________________
|