autox
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: The Tao of SM Inclusion/Exclusion

To: autox@autox.team.net, gs96@sgi.net
Subject: Re: The Tao of SM Inclusion/Exclusion
From: "Murray, Matthew D." <MDMURRAY@gwns.com>
Date: Mon, 4 Dec 2000 13:19:00 -0500
Nope, can't do it. :^) Actually, I drove a Supra turbo around Harrisburg at 
the 1994 Pro. Very fast off the line, and good handling, just a bit 
overweight (like me). Unfortunately, I've been sort of using the Porsche 
exclusion in conjunction with the Supras. Regretably, you own the victim of 
of my focus.  :^)

That being said, SM certainly has some noble goals, but it (IMO) skirts a 
bigger issue of working most of SM participants into our existing 
structure(s) without creating "I" or additional classes. (This also requires

*more* restructuring of existing classes)

The inference of P-cars being "rare and expensive" and therefore not 
attainable by the common Honda owner, doesn't ring true. 944 Turbo are in
the 
$7 to $14k and require a limited investment for performance mods.

Matt Murray
(I really have no dog in this, outside of being a P-car owner).
---------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Kent Rafferty
To:  autox@autox.team.net
Subject:  Re: The Tao of SM Inclusion/Exclusion
Couldn't just let it die could you Matt? :-) I thought
I managed to make it through another wave of
suprabashing (tm) that started back in the "why is the
Supra in E/SP" days, but nooo. I knew I shoulda just
sold the Supra and bought an E/SP M3 -- wait, bad
idea....:-)

Kent Rafferty
AP, uh, SM Supra


> I couldn't help but notice the phrase "rare and/or
very expensive". The last generation Supra was both
rare and expensive. Did I
miss something?
> Matt Murray

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>