Besides, AWD brings with it a weight and driveline power consumption
penalty. It
>is not a panacea. A lightweight, powerful front or rear driver is just as
likely
>to be able to win as an AWD car.
SCCA and IMSA both thought the same thing before the Audi's came over and
kicked everyone's but. There is no substitue for having all 4 wheels drive.
Look at the Mears at Pikes Peak, look at the fastest rally cars. Why do you
think AWD is banned in SCCA Showroom Stock?
>STU is about diversity. It's about "run whacha bring". It's about the
freedom to
>do what you want within a broad formula. It's not about boring, cookie
cutter
>classes dedicated to single marquees.
I totally disagree here. It is not about run whacha brung. If it was you
would allow all cars, within your engine formula to compete. Not just cars
with more then 2 seats. This is just a 'since I am not competitive in ST
lets make STU' or 'My car is not legal for ST so lets make STU because I
don't want to run Prepared or Modified' and 'I don't want 2 seat sports cars
in the class'
Don't matter how many ways you slice the cake this is still an "I" class.
If you want this class to truely be STU, U being unlimited, unrestricted,
uncola, unwhatever, you should allow 2 seat sports cars. What are afraid
of? Competition or getting beat?
Rick Cone
-----Original Message-----
From: dg50@daimlerchrysler.com <dg50@daimlerchrysler.com>
To: Rick Cone <conekiller@cwix.com>
Cc: autox@autox.team.net <autox@autox.team.net>; werace4u@aol.com
<werace4u@aol.com>
Date: Friday, July 16, 1999 11:27 AM
Subject: Re: STU Rules Update Update
>
>
>
>> Well I think you may be on to something.... It definitely is wide open >
if
>and only if you band all wheel drive.
>
>And ban not only the second most popular riceboy car (the DSMs) but also
the
>Audi A4, the Audi TT, the Suburu WRX, etc. etc. etc.
>
>Nope. This is a _permissive_ class. We aim to let as many people as we
possibly
>can play here.
>
>Besides, AWD brings with it a weight and driveline power consumption
penalty. It
>is not a panacea. A lightweight, powerful front or rear driver is just as
likely
>to be able to win as an AWD car.
>
>Imagine Daddio in a turbo Neon with a limited slip front diff and a real
>suspension. Imagine Endicott in a supercharged Integra R. Imagine GH in a
>supercharged M3.
>
>Now imagine McKiver or Allen in a built-up DSM. That sounds like a pretty
fair
>fight to me - in fact, I'd put my money on Daddio in the Neon.
>
>> AWD will be a HUGE advantage in
>> getting power down, especially when you talk about the power you guys
>> could potentally make.
>
>I won't lie to you (or anyone else) - I expect that STU will be dominated
by
>DSMs for the first season or so. The reason _why_ I think that is because
the
>DSMs have more tuning and development time in them than any other STU-esque
>cars. There is a large and growing DSM autocross contingent, there are a
number
>of National-level DSM drivers, autocross is very visible and promoted in
the DSM
>community, and there's a long line-up of would-be DSM autocrossers who only
need
>a class to come play in. I wouldn't be beating this drum if it were
otherwise.
>
>However, being intimately familliar with these cars, having seen first-hand
>(thanks to Harnish and Tatum) what a small, light car can do, and having
been
>associated with the Sport Compact Car "scene" for a number of years, I know
that
>there are lots of other cars out there (and undoubtably, lots of cars I
don't
>even know about) that have just as much potential in this class as the DSMs
do.
>As these cars are built and sorted out, the DSMs will have competition -
and
>that's a Very Good Thing. What I loved about G Stock was that there were 6
or 7
>different brands of car that could win on any given day. It made for
exciting
>racing. STU is GS on steroids.
>
>My expectation is that the DSM domination period in STU will be a lot
shorter
>than, say, the Miata domination period in BS, or the Neon domination period
in
>DS - because unlike the Stock classes, you have the option to build a slow
car
>faster.
>
>STU is about diversity. It's about "run whacha brung". It's about the
freedom to
>do what you want within a broad formula. It's not about boring, cookie
cutter
>classes dedicated to single marques.
>
>DG
>
>
>
|