Given that the E30 M3 is listed in Stock 5 (and is moving to GS next year -
does anyone remember when that was put up for member input? - I must have
flaked and not seen that) I think that will be even faster than the Type-R.
Just from gathering info from the web (however accurate that is :-) it looks
like the E30 M3 is missing the one thing that all G-Stock cars have - an
Achiles heel. Follow me for a second:
Type-R - FWD, No torque, narrow wheels.
DSM cars - Narrow wheels, heavy.
E36 BMW, Audi A4 - Heavy, big (relatively)semi-soft.
Prelude Type-SH - FWD, heavier than a Type-R.
The E30 M3 has:
RWD
192 hp, 170 torque.
0-60 in 6.9, but that requires a shift since second is good only for 56.
15x7 wheels.
Weight - 2500-2600 as far as I can tell.
Was it several years ago that Bob Tunnell beat all the MR2 Turbo, 944, etc.
at Wendover in one of these critters?
And indeed I _am_ biased, but at least I admit it!
Kevin McCormick
1997 GS Integra Type-R
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jeff Cashmore [mailto:cashmo@spec-rx7.org]
> Sent: Thursday, July 06, 2000 6:07 AM
> To: team.net
> Subject: Re: Stock class reclassings
>
>
> > I think that if the classing goes through there are gonna
> be alot of neons
> > going up for sale. Looking over last year's results the
> only neon that
> > posted a faster time than the type R was Mr Mark Daddio.
> The rest of us
> > mortal neon drivers would get creamed.
>
> So it's ok to get creamed by Mark Daddio in a Neon but not
> Bob Endicott in a
> Type R? What's the difference?
>
> > Also keep in mind that there is still more speed to be had
> out of that ITR
> > while the neon has had all of it's development. Maybe I'm
> wrong but there
> > are alot of neon drivers out there who are not going to be
> served by this
> > reclassing.
>
> And if the new Neon is faster than the old you're not going
> to be served by
> Chrysler either. I'm getting the idea that the SCCA likes to
> shake things up
> every 5 yrs or so. The Rx7tt had it's day in the sun and so
> has the 95-99
> Neon. I like them both because they're relatively cheap and
> they'll still be
> competative.
>
> Jeff Cashmore
>
|