> From: Brian M Kennedy <kennedy@i2.com>
>
> At 09:36 AM 7/16/99 , Pat MacAvoy wrote:
>
> >> I rather resent the implication that I'm creating a "DSM dominatrix
> class". I
> >> think there's a passle of supercharged Integra Rs, M3s, turbocharded Neons,
> >> Integra-motored Civics, DOHC Starions, hopped-up supercharged Grand Prixs
> >etc.
> >> etc. etc. who would beg to differ. For an "I" class, this one sure is wide
> >> open....
> >>
> >Now I think this pretty well sums up what is wrong with this concept.
> > IMHO, a civic won't keep up with supercharged M3 (951, etc.), nor will a
> DSM.
>
> Well, CSP M3's are regularly stomped by CSP Civics.
And CSP M3s routinely beat civics. Your point?
> Why do you think supercharging gives M3's a bigger advantage than Civics?
> Especially when engine swaps are allowed... which would be a useless option
> for an M3.
>
But with the suspension opened up to a greater level than SP rules (that
is my recollection), the M3 might be able to gain on the civic. My
recollection is that BMWs can't be lowered much due to camber changes.
But with suspension largely being free....
> I am sure some cars will turn out to be non-competitive in this class.
> But I am fairly confident that there will be *many* cars that can be
> very competitive given adequate prep. In fact, I would wager that there
> will be more competitive variety (make/model wise) than in any existing
> SP class. (OTOH, I'd also wager that all the top cars will be forced
> induction, and all will be boosting into the realm of reduced reliability.)
>
I don't think I can agree with the first point, but I know I do agree with the
second.
pat(no dog in this fight, not likely to have one)mac
..~Rsig
|