OK, I'll jump in here, at least partially to Mark's defense. If the
current rule is broken, it apparently became broken in the last 4 years
or so.
When I was on the SEB (I left 3 years ago) I felt the swaybar rule was
outdated. I believed that we should change it to "either but not both",
but was also interested in whether the membership would accept "both
ends stock". Anyway, after much discussion on the SEB we decided to put
it out to the membership. It was published in FasTrack as a straw poll,
with the idea that we would decide a course of action to back after the
results of the poll. The choices were 1) keep it as it is, 2) either
but not both, or 3) both stock.
The results were underwhelming. If recollection serves, we received
about 20 letters in response. Of these, opinions were split nearly
evenly between the three choices. Since options 2 and 3 are
diametrically opposed, and there was no overwhelming majority, and the
response was so low, we felt if we were to make a choice that would
serve the membership best it was to leave it as it was.
So this HAS been floated by the entire membership just 4 years ago or
so, with a response that led to keeping the current rule in place.
Maybe it's time to try again, but just because Team.Net can whip itself
into a fervor over an issue doesn't mean that fervor is universal.
EDITORIAL COMMENT. Going to both ends completely stock will widen the
gap in stock classes. A vote for completely stock is a vote for M030's,
1LE's, etc to be the big dogs in their respective classes with no remedy
available to other models. This makes the sport cater to more eclectic
vehicles, the exact opposite of what I suspect is wanted. So I wouldn't
go there. IMHO, of course.
--Byron
Isley, Jason C. wrote:
>
> Buddy, for some reason you are still missing the root of this
> discussion. The rule is outdated. I would bet if you look at the results
> from nationals that at least half of the cars are front wheel drive. When
> this rule was created I would guess none of the cars were front drivers.
> While I would not expect to see thing change overnight, I do think this rule
> needs to be looked at.
> I had no intention when I made the post to get into a debate about
> it. I was just looking for input from drivers, for what ever reason you felt
> the need to pipe up. If you are not interested in exploring options to help
> grow/change the sport or you don't agree you have the option to delete the
> message.
> The only person I hear squawking is you. The majority of the
> responses I have had to this agree that in some way this rule needs to be
> looked at and changed. No one expects it to happen overnight, however rear
> drive cars are not the majority anymore.
> If you are questioning my ability to drive the car that is fine. I
> am not a National champion and don't claim to be. I am not looking to change
> a rule to make myself a winner, anyone that thinks changing one thing on a
> car could do that is a little whacked.
> So grab you favorite CD jump in Z3 and go for a drive, sounds like
> you need to relax. The rest of us are hear to have a good time, don't be so
> negative, change is good.
> Have a great day, nice talking to you as usual.
>
> Jason Isley
> jisley@cell1.com
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: TeamZ3@aol.com [mailto:TeamZ3@aol.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 1999 3:39 PM
> To: JIsley@cell1.com; autox@autox.team.net
> Subject: Re: swaybar info(2)
>
> JIsley@cell1.com writes:
>
> << Ok, I will amend all future post to say "excluding AS so we don't mess up
> Mr. Sipe's happy little echo system". lol >>
>
> What am I, a dolphin or something?
>
> It's not about A Stock or Mr. Sipe's personal salvation.
>
> It concerns me that the proposal for Stock class rule changes seems to ever
> be on the increase, usually by some Mr/Ms Johnny-Come-Lately. Despite the
> continuous Team.net criticism of the SEB, my detailed conversations with the
>
> various committee members (you really should try it sometime) has
> demonstrated to me that they have a much greater appreciation for, and
> understanding of, the *entire* scope and impact of changes, much more so
> than
> Mr/Ms JCL can even begin to comprehend. There's a reason that the SEB is
> composed of members of long standing experience, just as there's a reason
> they don't cotton to the "rule change of the week" syndrone. The class
> rules
> are the foundation, and if the foundation isn't stable the whole thing can
> come crashing down.
>
> Since you're making it personal, let's get back to me. I could care less if
>
> swaybar rule changes one way or the other; I only want rules stability. I
> will still do everything within the rules to setup and tune the car to it's
> max potential. If you think changing the swaybar rule will somehow equalize
>
> the competition or provide you personally with a more level playing field
> then you're kidding yourself. You still have to drive the car to it's
> potential and a certain group of people will still have the latest &
> greatest
> equipment, the most technical knowledge, the best training, the most seat
> time, etc.
>
> Frankly, it all just sounds to me like a bunch of losers sqawking out
> excuses
> as to why they can't win. Hell, it'd be worth it to go back to pure stock,
> and I mean in every detail including replaceable wear parts, just to see who
>
> eats crow.
>
> M Sipe
> - fixated on winning, not making excuses
|