Hey BOB,
It's alright if I call you "BOB", even if I omit the second "O", isn't
it? Just for old times' sake?
Like that vagrant Huck reported a while back, previous SEBs have made
*2* exceptions to the wheel diameter rules in the past. You continaully
use the 12"->13" example. But the Fiesta wasn't exactly a killer, and
13" wheels weren't going to make it suddenly rule the roost. The fact
that some ancient SEB approved that allowance for such a no-count car is
hardly gonna hold sway on today's SEB. IMHO of course.
An example more similar to the situation you are pushing is the TRX
wheels of the late 70's and early 80's. At that time, another ancient
SEB allowed for metric wheels to go down to the next lower full inch
size. The cars effected were primarily 79-83 (84?) Mustangs with the
*awesome* Michelin TRX tire and wheel, which was something like 15.3
inches in diameter.
The argument that you make that these are enthusiast cars and people
wanted to run them were all true with that car. But there were even
more of them. So anyway, I'd suggest you use that example.
But wait, you might also note that allowance was removed from the
rulebook a few years ago, by a more modern SEB. Minor details, right?
I mean, I don't wanna interrupt your call for consistency here by
pointing out that the allowance has been added then repealed for
enthusiast cars before. That would only muddy the water.
Besides I know you're just searching for another "cause" since you got
the C4 Vettes moved to BSP. You miss being able to buddy-up with those
great guys on the SEB, and long for the days you could hang with 'em,
talkin' about Vettes, wheels, Porsches, etc.
Hey come to think of it, isn't there an upcoming vacancy on the SEB from
NorPac? Hmmm.
--Byron
Scotty *BOB* White wrote:
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rob Foley
>
> >2) Consider the importance of rules stability. Hypothetically, a 1"
> >reduction in wheel diameter for a stock C5 Corvette would by precedent have
> >to be made stock category wide. No big deal you say? Make it 18" to 17"
> >only? Doesn't that implicitly discriminate against all those members who
> >have vehicles with smaller diameter wheels; why can't they have the same
> >type of allowance
>
> In the first place Rob, it is not just *A* car we are talkin about.
> Second, we want to increase participation right? But, we have a large group
> of enthusiests that cannot compete because of a limitation with a stock spec
> on those cars. Not a stock spec that means extra scheduled maintanence, not
> a stock spec that means you need to put a roll cage in and climb over a bar
> to get in and out, not a stock spec that means you have to run an extra
> quart of oil or a full tank of gas to keep from starving a pump.
>
> But a stock spec that renders you utterly, hopelessly, miserably
> uncompetitive in some very popular cars (in our sport). A stock spec, BTW,
> that mirrors a limitation of a stock spec (12"13") that was addressed and
> solved years ago with the same process we are talking about right now. AND,
> I am willing to bet there are one HELLUVA lot more drivers out there with
> 18" wheels that this would allow to at least compete than there ever was
> with 12" wheels! There are no tires! There have not been any tires! There
> wasn't any tires when you (scac/seb) told everybody with 18"s to just wait a
> minute, well we been a waitin, FOR 2 YEARS!!! C'mon guys, right the wrong
> you did 2 years ago and quit tossin all this smoke an mirrors about SFCs
> around, man am I tired....
>
> sbw
|