GH Sharp wrote...
> Yes, there is no evidence that the DSM cars are dominant in ESP.
[snip]
> Until this happens, you're right.... the SEB doesn't know, and neither
> does anyone else, and no amount of arguing over HP and quarter-mile
> times is going to change that. So the SEB is left with trying to make
> two dissimilar cars equally competitive, one of which is pretty much at
> the end of its development curve SP-wise, and the other one that is
> still being developed. And we have no meaningful National results on
> which to base any of our decisions.
>
> The DSM guys go off in a huff because they feel they're being treated
> unfairly, and the ponycar contingent in ESP is afraid that if the DSM
> cars are allowed too much freedom under the rules that a
> National-caliber driver will seize the opportunity to build one and
> dominate a popular class. It's a no-win situation for everyone,
> including the SEB.
[Disclaimer: I appreciate the volunteer labor that goes into running
Solo2, and don't mean be ungrateful. Also, I have no dog anywhere near
this fight. ]
So, to sum up, the SEB had no evidence of a problem, but it went
ahead and wrote a rule aimed at one car that will cost a bunch of members
a whole wad of money, based on the suspicions of their competitors, which
in the end, helps no one.
Hard to imagine why the DSM folks are upset.
I thought cars were supposed to be reclassed if they were dominant, not
the object of custom rule-making. Wouldn't it be cheaper just to write a
rule that requires DSMs to bolt in a hundred pounds of ballast?
I just don't understand this decision at all, but I really don't like
to see members chased off, and if I drove a turbo-charged car, I'd be
long, long gone from SCCA.
--
D a v i d H i l l m a n
scscc, nma, scca, imoc
|