[Moore, John] ... In reference to SCCA classing the Fiero, they
have not only mis-
> classed the CS 2800lb 140hp Fiero,
[Moore, John] This is not exactly out of spec with the class, but
before anyone reacts, hear me out. The curb weight of my 93 MR2 is 2775. The
91 and 92 are 2705 according to the factory specs. The curb weight of an 86
fiero GT, as an example is 2778.
My 93 MR2 has 135 HP@5400, 145ft-lb@4400, the 91/92 have
only 130 HP@5400 and 140ft-lb@4400. The Fiero on the other hand has
140HP@5200 and 170ft-lbs@3600.
The MR2 has 0-60 numbers of 8.5 seconds. The V6 Fiero is in
7.5.
So on paper the Fiero looks like a fit for CS. Having owned
a 87 Fiero and a 93 MR2, I can say that the early Fiero is killed by its
suspension and brakes. I have never driven an 88, and am told the 88
performs much better though and is more competitive. The problem is, where
to put the V6 Fiero? It doesn't really fit anyplace except CS based upon the
class philosophies and the Fieros HP and Torque numbers.
> how would you like to try the
> 90hp 2650lb 4 cylinder Fiero in ES against the Neon?
[Moore, John] I think that the 4 cyl Fiero should be in HS. With
it's 92 HP, 2707 Curb Weight and 14X6 wheels, I think it fits HS not ES.
0-60 in 10.9, 60-0 braking in 140 ft. The only number that might keep it out
is the skipad numbers of .84G on factory stock tires. What do you Team
Underdog guys think?
> There is a campaign on the various Fiero lists to write letters to the
> SCCA regarding this "oversight" about our marque - that has been
> "overlooked" for at least a decade.
>
> G
[Moore, John] ...
|