> Street Prepared wasn't then, isn't now and never has been a "logical
> progression" from stock to prepared.
Actually, Steve, I do not really disagree with you. IMHO, "progression" was
not the consideration when SP was invented. Rather "something in between"
was the consideration, really without a whole lot of thought as to where
such a car might come from, or where it might eventually go.
It did, however, work out that Stock>SP was a progression simply because
Stock was the base model and SP was the base model with stuff done to it.
For that matter, Prepared (originally the GCR Production rules) was the base
model with stuff done to it, but as we now see, different stuff (and perhaps
arguably, more stuff). It was GT that moved to the idea of building cars
that were not built off the base model, but off tubeframes.
BTW, just because SP and P go in different directions from Stock, does not
make one logical and the other not -- they are just different. Today they
must be accepted as such.
> Under Rocky's model, why isn't the
> "stock" category "out of control"? Did the SEB envision quad adjustable
> shocks, custom made front swaybars, Hoosier DOT race tires, ACR Neons and
> Z06 Corvettes when they wrote the prep rules for stock? Of course not.
> There are more people complaining on this list about how stock is not
> "stock" enough than there are people complaining that Street Prepared is
too
> "prepared" and not enough "street". >>
You are probably right. Well maybe not out of control, but certainly not the
Stock class cars on which the rulewriters of the early '70s were basing
their work. Stock cars today are so much better than they were in the '70s.
Want a great example? Roger "the famous" Johnson is a 6-time National
Champion. His first three championships (1981, 83, 84) I beat his times with
my mid-pack DP Spitfire. His last three I'm not even close. The difference?
Me, I am in the same car, with finishes in the mid-teens all those years
(and a period when I was not able to do any developing of the car, so it was
pretty much the same year to year). Roger is in a succession of several
Corvettes, illustrating nicely the improvement of the breed.
> Now, today, a
> good SP car is not that far in performance from a good P car. Both are
> Prepared, just in different ways and with different restrictions.
>
> SP is too well established now to undo it.
>
> << By "well established" I assume you mean 'successful'. So why would a
> successful category need to be "undone"? With SP class entries
consistently
> outnumbering prepared class entries (in all but CP), isn't it logical
that
> perhaps Prepared is the category that needs a makeover?>>
Well established, successful, all of the above. If anything, I am suggesting
any talk about the supposed progression of S>SP>P (whether or not it ever
existed) should be considered moot. SP is simply too successful in its
current form. It may not be a progression, but it clearly ain't broke.
It would have been nice if the rulemakers in 1979 had had the vision to make
a natural progression from Stock to SP to Prepared. It could have been done.
It wasn't. That was then. This is now. We cannot back up time 22 years and
do it over. And with the 20/20 of hindsight, those now in SP and enjoying
themselves there clearly would have no desire to do so.
We've managed to succeed and grow Solo II the past 22 years despite the fact
SP is not a natural progression from S to P. If anything, it has proven that
"natural progression" is probably a myth that never needed to be reality. If
someone wants to have a P car, he will build or buy a P car. It is a goal
unto itself. The driver doesn't really feel any need to have spent any time
in SP first.
But where all this jazz about "progression" arises anew is the FasTrack
query that began this thread, the idea of accommodating cars built to SP
rules in Prepared. Not needed, say I. Especially not needed is a fifth
ruleset in Prepared when we are already beleaguered by four. Nor does one
category of cars (SP) need two places to play.
--Rocky
/// autox@autox.team.net mailing list
///
/// To unsubscribe send a plain text message to majordomo@autox.team.net
/// with nothing in it but
///
/// unsubscribe autox
///
/// or try http://www.team.net/cgi-bin/majorcool
///
|