Paul wrote:
>And that it was placed in classes where it could dominate was
just a
>coincidence????
Look at the drivers who have won in this "dominant" car. Is it
your position that those folks would NOT win in another car?
>Perception? Take a look at the _times_ at Nationals. It would
have won
>CS, placed in 3rd in BS, and come in 4th in DSP. That is
_perception_???
Yep. Given the variations in conditions over the course of the
event, comparison of times from different run groups at a single
event isn't necessarily indicative of the relative performance
potential of different cars.
>That sure sounds like semantics to me. Aut the _key_ is placing
it in
>the right class where it doesn't _dominate_.
Lessee here: it's a fwd econobox wirh go-faster factory stuff
like slightly stiffer and more adjustable suspension. Sounds a
lot like a CRX or Civic Si or a Sentra SE-R. And where are THOSE
cars classed? DS, right. Now, that wasn't too difficult, was it?
>Stock cars have suspensions which have inherent compromises that
do not
>lend themselves to be balanced on autocross or race courses.
Yep, and the ACR fits that description. Just like the SE-R, BMW
318is (which won DS the last time a really top-notch driver
campaigned one at Naitonals), Civic Si, etc., etc. what's your
point?
>Street prepared cars do not.
Once again: the difference between Stock and SP is what the OWNER
of the car does to it, not what the MANUFACTURER does. Not too
hard to define, but apparently difficult for some to grasp.
Jay
|