dg50@daimlerchrysler.com wrote:
> > The two sets of optima are mutually exclusive to a large
extent.
>
> This is nowhere near as big a deal as is commonly made out to
be.
Yes it is. You may elect to tolerate a stiff-riding,
un-airconditioned car on the street, but you can't extend from
that to claim that a competitive SM ride will generally be
considered "streetable."
>A
> properly-built SM or SP car is still suprisingly streetable.
Certainly no more so than a "properly-built" SP car, given that
the SM alowances are a superset of SP.
>My car -
> fiberglass race seats, 600lb springs, unobtanium shocks, and
the works - is
> still a comfortable daily driver.
Based on your criteria, so's my ASP Europa. I'm sure it rides a
lot better than your SM car. I don't consider the car suitable
for street use, however, and that unsuitability is due entirely
to modifications for Solo II.
> Do not underestimate what people will put up with in a street
car.
Your masochism is not the issue here. ;<)
> Bingo. This is why SM allows almost no chassis work,
So, you're claiming that SP allows no "chassis" work then? And,
by extension, that unlimited spring rates, almost unlimited
bushing materials, offset bushings, ride height changes, etc.,
don't offer the possibility of compromising a car's
streetability?
>The single most
> expensive and time consuming (and difficult) part of building a
Real
> Racecar (read: Prepared and Modified) is the chassis
development.
Which includes getting ride rates, roll rates, damping, roll
centers, etc., optimized. And which the SP and SM rules allow you
to do. I don't buy your argument for a second.
> Chassis
> development is what separates the men from the boys, in both
the
> engineering and cost departments. This, more than anything
else, is what
> separates a "street" car from a "race" car - so we allow almost
NOTHING
> here in SM.
Based on your assertion, then, SP cars are even more streetable
than SM ones, since they have stock "chassis."
>Note that National-SM and Regional-SM, while they share the same
rules
> (which makes for nice easy progression from Regional to
National) are NOT
> the same.
Yeah, they are. In exactly the same way that "National-anything"
is the same as its "regional" counterpart. You're just blowing
smoke with that one.
> Regional SM is more for the "I built my car this way and now I
> want a place to run with it" crowd,
And it has exactly the same rules as "National" SM. Face it, if
you happen to live in the same Region as a National champion
driver who runs in local events, the distinctions you're trying
to make simply do not exist. The "local" guy who's just running
his street car will get whupped good.
> National SM serves as an example, inspiration, and target for
those in
> Regional SM,
EVERY class in Solo II functions in exactly the same way. SM has
brought nothing new to the table in this regard.
> > If the ridiculous "street licensed" requirement remains in
SM,
>
> It's not "ridiculous", it serves to help keep folks honest.
No, it doesn't. I can license anything with four wheels - even a
formula car, it's been done before - for street use, given
sufficent motivation. Having the tag indicates nothing about a
car's legality or practical streetability.
Jay
|