CHD responds:
>I think that's EXACTLY what they are doing (classing by potential).
The 1.6
>vs. 1.8 debate raged even when I chaired the SCAC. I don't think the
>SCAC/SEB would have put the car in C if it thought that it would
either
>dominate, or be a total dog. It was just time to do it for
competition and
>demographic reasons. If it was a "new" car with no data points, you
don't
>put it in C/S for fear of making a successful $5-10,000 class into a
$40,000
>small "cherry picker" class... If it is campaigned by good drivers
and shows
>itself to be a true C/S car, then you consider it at that point in
time.
I fail to see why any "cherry picker" car is acceptable no matter what
the cost. There have been plenty of low-cost examples. And as Andy
Bettencourt so elequently pointed out, some of them have had
substantial contingency money associated with them. :)
Paul Foster
|