Dennis:
A few other thoughts (since I'm the one with the questions that you've
answered):
A. I would be in favor of convertibles that meet the four passenger, front
engine, etc. criteria. So what if they're potentially lighter?
B. Most racing organizations have a rotary equivalency formula. The thought of
a triple rotor, turbocharged engine stuffed inside one of the top CSP RX2/RX3s
would be interesting!
C. What about gear ratio/final drive ratio changes, without limitation? Don't
know about the small displacement crowd, but that's one of the most common
muscle car mods.
Al Chan
-----Original Message-----
From: dg50@daimlerchrysler.com [mailto:dg50@daimlerchrysler.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 14, 1999 11:22 AM
To: autox@autox.team.net; werace4u@aol.com
Subject: RE: Revised STU Proposed Rules - Plan of attack
(sent to team.net as well)
> But a couple of thoughts:
> A. Do you think that it would hurt the "all inclusive" theme to not allow
> convertibles?
When I think "convertible" I tend to think "Miata" - as in "superlight little
fast rotating beastie". Not something that should be allowed in STU.
I'm concerned that convertible versions of STU-eligible cars would/could be
much
lighter (and with a roll bar just as stiff, or at least "stiff enough").
Perhaps this is mistaken, so I'll throw it out for discussion? Should we allow
4-seat convertibles in STU?
> B. I think that the engine swap wording is a little vague. Does Acura and
> Honda count as the same make? What about a Yugo with a Fiat engine - can
> they use any Fiat engine? What about grey market engines? I'm thinking that
>
a Mazda RX2 or RX3 with a Cosmo triple rotor would be a hot car!
The way I would answer is this (comments welcome):
1) Yes, Honda and Acura are the same, because the motor in the Acura is
identified as a Honda motor on the actual castings.
2) If the Yugo came with a factory Fiat motor, then yes, any Fiat motor under
3.1L displacement is a potential candidate.
3) Grey market motors (of the same make as the chassis) are OK too, although
the
comment about rotories raises another issue - are rotories the same,
displacement wise, as piston motors? Do we need a different displacement limit
for rotory motors?
> D. Eventually, folks are going to want sub-classes. What is the evolution
> plan for that? There will be cars that evolve to be faster, whether via more
> availability of parts or more favorable swapping.
At this time, I don't think STU should be sub-classed - ever. The formula is
so
open-ended that pretty well any car that's not a complete pig should be able
to
compete if enough $$ and development time was thrown at it.
However, I think there's room for at least one _sister_ class - Street Sports
Unlimited (for 2 seaters like CRXen, Miatae, and MR-2s) However, I'll only
tilt
at one windmill at a time. :)
Again, comments welcome.
DG
|