Oh boy, here we go again...Roger, you were right!
Perry,
Nobody has the time to type everything into these stupid messages to
appease the babblings of every Tom, Dick and Harry who has a new version of
I Stock. The facts as listed below came right from the Firehawk homepage.
To blast me publicly by saying "...you demonstrated a lack of knowledge of
the cars you are supposed to classify that is truly frightening." just
because I chose to omit the fact that the Competition package wasn't
available on all years is upsetting. Every piece of information in the
original post is true. Let me spell it out for you in a more
'knowledgeable' format:
Yes the 1992 car was a real special car which could have been ordered with
all the pieces below. Yes in 1993 and beyond the package got a lot
'softer'. The problem with real 'Tuner' cars is the lack of information
when options started and stopped. Proving the legality of a non-production
car in the impound lanes is a problem. The problem with a car that leaves
the factory for final assembly is that running changes can occur without
hitting factory documentation. If you can provide year by year
documentation on these cars, please forward it to the SEB. And copies of
dealer brochures don't count.
As far as the WS6, the Camaro SS and to a small extent the Firehawk; some
people have thought (including me) that the newer versions of this car,
which were essentially factory built, should be moved to FS. What I'm not
sure that the SCAC had, when making an original recommendation on these
cars, is the definitive answer on where final assembly took place.
So maybe we proactively try to dig up all the information that pertains to
these cars, sort it out, and place the 1992 FHawk on the exclusion list,
and the 1993+ cars in wherever and so on and so on. The major issue in my
mind is that nobody (to the best of my knowledge, I have never been copied
on one) has written a letter documenting the cars, and making legitimate
classing suggestions. Where are the people who want to race one?
If you have something to add (because you are obviously very knowledgeable
about F-Bodies), then do so in a constructive manner instead of a
destructive manner. Maybe, "Andy neglected to mention that the Comp
Package was only available in 1992 and the after that the cars were
more..." instead of "Now the fact that they are not production cars is
enough to get them excluded from stock in my opinion, but let's not spout
such horrible information please."
Horrible indeed.
AB
Perry Kincy <kincy@ccnet.com> on 03/10/99 11:55:24 PM
To: Andrew Bettencourt/FIELD SALES/Kingston
cc: Jim & Marilyn Rohn <rohns@doitnow.com>, richj50@bit-net.com,
autox@autox.team.net
Subject: Re: Firehawk - Real info
Jeesh, Andy, I was trying to be quiet and was succeeding until you
demonstrated a lack of knowledge of the cars you are supposed to classify
that
is truly frightening.
Please get some information before you spout off.
The 92 Firehawk was truly a custom built, powerful, and unusual car. That
has
not been the case in 93, 94, 95, 96 or since. They are stock cars with
some
foofoo appearance mods. Now the fact that they are not production cars is
enough to get them excluded from stock in my opinion, but let's not spout
such
horrible information please.
PK
Andrew_Bettencourt@kingston.com wrote:
> I obviously wasn't clear on this. The early Firehawks had special
engines
> that produced a lot more power than their Formula or TransAm counterparts
> of the day. Here is the real stuff: 350TPI, 350hp, 390ft/lbs. Special
> rods, forged pistons, aluminum blocks...
>
> Production numbers:
> 1992 25
> 1993 201
> 1994 500
> 1995 743
> 1996 86
> 1997 163
>
> How about that Competition Package Option you ask? Just a few cool
things
> like:
> 6 point roll bar
> Recaro seats
> Simpson 5-point harness'
> 4 piston Brembo calipers
> 13" cross drilled rotors
> rear seat delete
> lightweight hood
> aluminum block
>
> These cars are perfect examples of why 'tuner' cars scare the SCAC and
the
> SEB. There no definitive information as to when these options and others
> like them started or ended. You want them in stock?
>
> AB
> Andy Bettencourt
> Solo II Stock Class Advisory Committee
> Chief Operating Steward, NER
> 1995 Mazda RX7 R2 - Super Stock
> 1966 Sunbeam Tiger MK 1A
>
> At 12:34 PM 3/9/99, Andrew_Bettencourt@kingston.com wrote:
> >Production numbers. SLP produces a very limited number of Filewawks
each
> >year. When they first came out, they were head and shoulders
>
> what the???
>
> are you talking about something else? I also assume you are talking 93+
> cars, 500-some built in 1993.
>
> I haven't seen ANY Firehawks that are "shampoo" above the well driven &
> prepared *stock* Formula or even the Z28 .
>
> >above their
> >Formula and Trans Am siblings. That isn't the case now, but it is very
> >tough to discern between models years when an aftermarket tuner is
> >involved.
>
> have you been taking lessons on how to speak "Clintonese?"
>
> :-)
>
> Jim Rohn
> Beater Racing
> driving f-bodies longer than some of you have been alive...OMG, I'm an
Old
> Fartz!
--
Perry Kincy (kincy@kincy.com)
93 Camaro A4; TPIS heads; ZZ9 Cam; AS&M headers, 12.79@110.209
94 Corvette ZF6: LPE heads, 211/219 Cam, 4.09s, 12.93@111.584
98 Camaro 1LE ESP Autox Car; 13.6@105.955 (a year ago; ? now)
|