Hello fellow ButtHeat member! :-)
> With all due respect to you Joe, I still fail to see the point of moving
> everything around. I of course am a quite in the middle of this whole GS
> thing, but the class seems to have more than one car that are competitive
> and capable of winning. I think the Type R and DSM's are competitive
> against each other as was shown when I borrowed a Type R in Evansville and
> came in 2nd to Daniel Ledford in his DSM.
I too think the DSM and Type R are simular in performance, even though they
are signifiacately different cars.
> There are many classes where there is only ONE car to have if you want any
> chance to win. BS and DS both have only one car that normally competes.
> Now I'll agree that DS probably has more than Neon's, but because of the
> contingency involved, most of the good drivers are in the Neons.
Agreed, but with the Type R and Talon in DS (one example), DS goes from a
one car class to a two or three car class (if the Neon is competitive with
these cars). Also, with the Neon money going away, I bet a large majority
of Neon drivers will jump to other cars/classes. By doing this you open GS
back up to the other 10 cars that have shown to be consistantly simular in
type and performance.
> Besides, we only need to look back to last year in GS to see that things
> aren't all that different. At the beginning of the year, it was widely
> accepted that the car that won most of the time was the MX6, with the
Camaro
> being competitive also. Look there, 2 cars are the ones that are
> competitive. You and I then came into the mix with the A4, and with the
way
> we were driving the A4 won just about everything we entered. How much of
> that was car and how much was driver we don't know. Then, the DSMs
started
> showing up and winning. As you and I both know, we were now at a big
> disadvantage because of our weight. We could no longer keep up at
altitude.
> We could still keep up on some courses, but not all. I was just as
bothered
> as anyone when the Type R was classed as late as it was last year. I was
> upset because of the potential of the car as well as it being too late to
do
> anything about it, such as switch cars.
True, we did well in the A4, but look at the entire season of data, and we
did not dominate, we were competitive. Can you say the same thing this
year?
> I obviously did see the potential of the Type R and was able to get a
> co-drive in one for this year and I've done very well. Obviously the Pax
> factor will probably change for next year, and yes GS is probably a bit
> faster than it has been in the past, but I just don't see any point in
> breaking it up when there is more than one car that is competitive.
I saw it also, and almost jumped in with you, but I had a hankering for RWD
and power %-). I agree that with the Type R and Talon make up a pretty good
class, but with all the mis matched cars/classes we have, I think it's worth
shuffling to fix, if it can not upset the apple cart much if any.
> Both cars may be faster than the rest of GS, but there cannot and will not
> be a point where there are a large number of cars that will be competitive
> against each other on every course in a class. I realize AS has more than
> two cars that can be competitive, but at this point, it's really only two
> manufacturers...... ;-)
Three if you count the MR2 turbo's (especially at the pro's). GS had _7_
different manufactures in the trophies last year (two were the DSM and Type
R) so 5 without them, and look at the new potential cars like the FWD Audi
TT and Celica that look to be good cars. There are others like the Mercedes
that has yet to be tried.
> A couple of people have brought this up, but it seems to me that GS has
been
> redefined, and other than maybe changing the Pax factor for next year, I
> don't see the point in moving things around.
It has been redefined. It seems others don't think so. It's a lot like
moving the Miata (specifically the 1.8) out of BS to free up the nice line
up of CS cars. Why not do the same for GS.
---JCG
|