Scott Meyers wrote:
>> 1. Exhaust systems. Stock is stock. You gotta go back to the
>> dealer to replace your muffler and exhaust pipes. Ever check on
>> what that costs? It'll wake you right up.
>
>You mean like the factory replacement Mazda RX-7 cats instead of
>aftermarket ones? That is the case in existing Stock right now.
No, it's not. Aftermarket cats are allowed once a car is outside of the
50k mandatory emissions warranty period. The "same type and size"
restriction is there, but you're not required by the rules to buy the
manufacturer's replacement cat.
> Look for
>impossible sounding reasons to not do this as you wish, the fact is that
>it would be no more expensive to do that than buy the necessary
>aftyermarket parts now to be competitive..
Lemme get this straight. Are you really trying to claim that a set of
replacement shocks from Porsche won't cost more than the Konis you can
buy from an aftermarket distributor? Or a factory exhaust will cost less
than a straight pipe put in at Midas plus a SuperTrapp? Let's see the
numbers...
>It seems that Pep Boys or Checker auto parts might be deemed
>equivalent. Do they carry Porsche parts? ;-)
See above. LOTS of aftemarket replacement and service parts are available
for Porsches from non-factory sources. And, most of the time, they cost
less than the same parts bought at the dealer.
>The "Sky is falling" generic threat that our world will collapse?
Are you saying that what you propose _won't_ make a typically-maintained
three or four year old car illegal in Stock? Restrictive rules, in the
limit, always increase costs, and they always fail to prevent those with
money to spend from gaining an advantage by spending it.
>There are many who sample our sport, see "Stock" cars with the fantastic
>modifications, and never return.
I'd say it's more accurate to say that "There are many who sample our
sport, see "Stock" cars beat them by several seconds, and never return."
I know some of those folks. It's pretty difficult to admit that you're
not the driver you thought you were. It's a whole lot easier to say "I
didn't win because those other guys spent more money." Doesn't make it
true, though.
>I'm not suggesting that we create a place for everyone to win. I *am*
>suggesting that we create a place where the perception of fairness in a
>stock setting is stronger, and that everyone has a chance to do well.
You won't stand a chance of doing well if you don't first acknowledge
that the driver is the most important element, especially in Stock.
>Those of us who prepare to the near limit of the rules are a strong
>influence on potential competitors.
The biggest influence on newcomers' perceptions is the time differentials
they typically encounter, and it's _not_ due to differences in vehicle
preparation.
>Don't want to buy the factory or 'allowed" Cheker/other alternatives? Go
>to the Street Mod classes.
No thanks. SP works fine for me.
>There may be the need to define a stock-equivalent source for parts.
>Maybe not.
"Stock-equivalent" IS defined. You can't install shocks that change the
suspension geometry, replacement suspension bushings can't be stiffer
than OEM, etc. But none of those items fits the concept of "pure stock."
What exactly is the problem with the existing allowances (except the
front swaybar rule, but let's not go there, it won't change anyway)?
Jay "Stock aint' broke" Mitchell
|