I absolutely agree that we should start on tires next but the SEB has shocks
in front of them now. That second set of rims is a member killer. I concede
that the premise of Stock as being an entry is a very arguable one, but we
need something to hang our hat on or what is the point of any limits at all?
It funny that SM is our draw to the outside.
Tony
----- Original Message -----
From: "Rex Tener" <rex_tener@yahoo.com>
To: "Anthony Tabacco" <atabacco@california.com>
Cc: <ba-autox@autox.team.net>; "Rex Tener" <rex_tener@yahoo.com>
Sent: Thursday, August 08, 2002 11:33 AM
Subject: Re: Stock Shock Chalk Talk
> At 09:30 AM 8/8/2002 -0700, Anthony Tabacco wrote:
> >"It is the intent of this rule that Stock Class serve as the entry class
to
> >the sport and that cost containment is of primary importance to that
goal.
>
> I disagree with the premise that stock class is an entry class to the
sport
> and that cost containment is a primary importance in stock or any
> preparation level.
>
> In the last ten years in the sport I have spent about $5K on shocks. In
> the same time period I have spent close to $30K on tires!!! The whole
> shock debate is a giant red herring. Shock costs are minimal, even with
> $3600 shocks, when averaged over the competitive life of a car. Tire
costs
> are much higher and if anyone was worried about cost containment, then
> tires would be the number one place to start controlling costs!
>
> --
> Rex Tener
> rex_tener@yahoo.com
> 1996 BMW M3, SCCA SFR Solo II Street-Mod #173
|