----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve Hoelscher" <stevehh@hiwaay.net>
> Un-doing the issue is met with the same resistance that un-doing wheels
and
> intakes in SP are. "I don't want to be forced to buy new wheels" is your
> primary objection. First of all, that is not the case. A rule allowing a
> maximum width for the "assembly" would leave your current wheels legal.
So
> you would not be "forced" to change. However, you would have a "choice"
to
> change. There could also be "competition adjustments" that could be used
to
> keep the non-cantilever equipped cars from having a significant advantage.
> Say, a 50 or 100 lb weight penalty for use of a wider wheel.
I have never seen an equivalency formula that ever was truly equivalent on
an event-to-event, venue-to-venue basis. And unfortunately the historical
reality is, once a new "allowance" is granted, it always manages to get
pushed a little farther (or a lot farther) than the rulemakers ever
envisioned. Yeah, right, I could still use my 6" wheels with cantilevers and
you (not Steve specifically, a generic "you") could use your 8" wheels with
straightwall radials. The new allowance would start people figuring the
angles, come up with ways they would be superior, and all us on 6-inchers
would have to go to new wheels in order to catch up.
(And those of us who do double duty with our cars -- road racing and solo --
would have to swap wheels back and forth all the time, not to mention
suspension settings, etc. Right now my primary setup difference is I road
race on lower pressures because multiple laps will build the pressure to
optimum; for Solo I need to start at optimum.)
Almost anything ever permitted in solo or road racing as an "allowance" soon
became "the setup" and woe betide any who did not jump on board.
Thing is, people -- IT DOES NOT MATTER WHAT THE RULES ARE, IT ONLY MATTERS
THAT THERE ARE RULES. A wide wheel rule would work. An unrestricted wheel
rule would work. A narrow wheel rule would (and does) work. They all work.
It leaves only to decide which to use. The decision was long ago made. We
have a narrow wheel rule. It works. There is no good reason to change it
just because some "would like something else."
I an less opposed to a wide-wheel rule than I am to changing a rule that
currently exists and works, because the change would only cost money that,
for those of us who already have P cars, has already been spent and does not
need to be spent again.
Bollinger was responding to an anticipated disappearance of cantilevers.
There was indeed, at the time he formulated his proposal, some discussion
that that might happen. Steve perceived a problem and came up with a
solution. Good for him. Had the problem come to pass, it would have been a
plausible solution (but not the only solution). The problem did not happen.
It is not likely to happen in the near future. Ergo, the solution becomes
unnecessary. Every other argument presented falls simply in the "I'd like to
do it differently" category.
----- Original Message -----
From: <dg50@daimlerchrysler.com>
> Somebody (Rocky) needs to sit down (Rocky) and write a detailed (Rocky)
> history of the sport.
Riiiiiight! Soon's that $100,000 advance check from Simon and Schuster comes
in, I'll get right on it. Wonder how many copies in the first printing?
:-)
Actually, I've written it several times, but not really the "detailed"
history that would be book-length, or even pamphlet-length. Just
magazine-story length.
If course, I do compile the statistics of the Nationals, which serves as a
pretty good bare-bones history. "Solo Stats" is detailed, but not prose.
It's even for sale. I don't mean to sound like I am just plugging my "Solo
Stats" book, but it is there for $40 (taking orders now; delivery in time
for Christmas giving). Primarily it is a record book of Nationals, but from
it you can glean such things as when classes were created and what was in
them or at least what was winning them.
"Solo Stats" began life just as my own compilation of stats for my own use
in covering the Solo II Nationals. I found I needed to have the history in
order to put the present into perspective. There was no resource to which I
could turn, so I had to create my own. Damn thing has grown to nearly 300
pages now!
The history of the evolution of the classes would probably be found, if not
from sitting at the feet of Old Fartz who were there, then by comparing
rulebooks from then to now. If you went through 10-20 years of rulebooks and
just focused in on each year's change bars, you'd get a pretty good pkcture.
--Rocky
[This is a fun debate. It is very enjoyable discussing with folks like Steve
and Dennis who argue an issue with passion but also with reason. None of us
is right or wrong here, we just hold differing opinions. Team.net at its
best!]
/// 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
///
|