Richard Nichols says:
>I'm suggesting that the older cars STAY in S and SP, but be
allowed more
>preparation than the newest cars.
That's just not a workable idea, and it's based on an incorrect
premise: that older cars are intrinsically less competitive in
Stock. I cited several cases to point out the incorrectness in an
earlier post, and there are many others. Old cars become less
common - on the street AND in autox competition - because they
wear out, rust away, get totaled, or simply cease to be of
interest to enthusiast drivers. That's natural, and no change in
the rules will change it.
>It's the LACK of this preparation that keeps them from being
fully
>competitive with the newest cars, simply by virtue of
technological
>evolution,
Again, false premise. "Technological evolution" does NOT
automatically lead to improved autox performance. Look at A2 vs.
A3 VWs, 86-87 vs. 88-90 (or so) civic Sis, 1st gen vs. 2nd gen
RX7s, 91 vs. 92-on MR2s, etc., etc. In the above cases, it is
generally agreed that the earlier cars are better, not worse,
autox cars.
> and which encourages those who want to be fully competitive to
>buy new.
No. "Those who like to drive new cars" are motivated to buy new,
"those who chase manufacturers' contingency dollars" are
motivated likewise, but the desire to be competitive does not
necessarily lead to a motivation to buy a new car. You're
proposing a solution where it has not been demonstrated that
there is a problem.
Jay
|