> JCG writes:
>
> While I suspect most classing doesn't take into consideration where
> a car can use them or not, I say forget whether or not crash bolts can
> be
> used, and issue a stock spec limit on camber. That way all cars will
> have
> an equal playing field with camber.
Another view offered.......
This makes (camber allowance) far more sense than "open front sway bar"
idea to me. As long as Stock classes are being reshuffled, this would be
a good time to readjust allowances, or even take away *all* such
"goodies"! I especially think that the $1000 shocks (per corner) need to
be outlawed. This flies in the face of the whole "Stock" concept IMHO.
By allowing some degree .... :-) .... of camber adjustment for all stock
cars, I fathom that tire wear factor would be better (i.e., cost
effective). When the BFG R-1 went away, the camber limited cars were
essentially screwed. Sure, you could go ahead an run the larger tires,
and the results were somewhat similar, but the tire wear of the outside
edges was extreme. Thus tire life was greatly shortened.
Those with "mucho dinero" could care less - the rest of us, those who
would perhaps make up the "1000 in 2000", are directly affected.
Look at the big picture, and not from under the umbrella of the current
"Stock Tree Forest". Take a step back and look at what *should be*, and
not what is.
Lastly, I think the suggested re-org of the Stock classes is a step in
the right direction. Now, shall we make it a "two-step" , or the same old
waltz? ;-)
Scott Meyers
|