autox
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: Revised STU Proposed Rules - Plan of attack

To: "'dg50@daimlerchrysler.com'" <dg50@daimlerchrysler.com>,
Subject: RE: Revised STU Proposed Rules - Plan of attack
From: Phil Osborne <posborne@minuteman-ups.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Jul 1999 09:45:23 -0500


Dennis wrote:
 Dennis' Note: The original STU rules wording required that the vehicle
both be registered for the street, and have passed an
       emissions test. However, State/Province licencing requirements and
emissions requirements vary, and range from no
       requirements (Kentucky) to vastly stringent requirements 
(California). As
 such, the SCCA cannot maintain a level playing field
       without explicitly specifying the equipment that must be on the car 
in
order for it to be "street legal".


This is in no way an attempt to fuel the flames, just my opinion....
 If the car is to be a StreetTouring classed car, it is my opinion that the 
original wording be retained.  Street Touring Unlimited, being an extended 
class of Street Touring, should retain it's Street Touring status as the 
name implies.  Altering the original intent of Street Touring rules, just 
to accommodate unlimited mods, even those that may render the vehicle 
incapable of being licensed for the street in some states, should not be 
allowed.  If we are in fact attempting to draw the maxed out street pocket 
rockets, doesn't it make sense that they should be legal licensed street 
vehicles, irregardless of the state in which they are licensed.  Otherwise, 
the whole concept of Street Touring is compromised. Other than allowing 
supercharging and turbo mods, what is the major difference between this 
proposal and the current Street Prepared rules?

Phil Osborne

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>