If one does this 10 year rule thingy, just how will it enforced? Its
2002 now, so the 10 year rule thingy would state nothing but cars
produced from the 1993 model year forward. I smell anarchy... If Joe
Average has a '93 300zxtt, he would definately be eligable, but what
about the guy with the '90 model 300zxtt? Same car, only a few years
older, but is 13 years old, and falls outside the 10 year rule. So you
decide to let him play, since there is no differences. Another fellow
has a '93 'Vette. Gets to play. His friend has a '90 model 'Vette.
Does he get to play? It's a C4 chassis? What about the dude in the '85
model C4 'Vette? How about the '93 Mustang GT? Would the '89 be
allowed? How about the '87?
All this rule would be saying to grassroots people is: If you don't have
enough money, or want to spend the money to play in our sandbox, tough.
Ron N. - Dalton, GA
(no auto loans, but making payments to parts stores :-)
Ignasi Palou-Rivera wrote:
>
> On Thu, May 02, 2002 at 10:18:40AM -0400, Rick Cone wrote:
> > First and foremost IF we went to a 7/10 year rule in stock, the SCAC/SEB
> > would have a much easier time of classing cars. Probably 70% of the cars
> > listed in the rule book would be gone from NATIONAL competition. The last
> > 30% will be broken out into Ultra Competitive classes. Since all newer cars
> > share similar technologies, the SCAC/SEB can better brake up that remaining
> > cars into 9 classes, perhaps even drop a few.
> >
> > This is how it might look.
> > SS - The Ultra Stock that people here seem to want.
> > (Z06/Viper/Ferrari/Whatever)
> > AS - Sports Car High Performance (C4 Corvette/RX7TT)
> > BS - Sports Car Medium Performance (S2000/M3/Boxster/ And ALL F Bodies)
> > CS - Sports Car Low Performance (Miata/MR2/IS300/3 Series BMW)
> > DS - Sport Touring (FWD High Perfomance) (TypeR/Subaru's/New Integra Type
> > S/Mini S)
> > ES - Sport Touring (FWD Medium Performance) (Celicas/Foci/Civics/Mini (non
> > S))
> >
> > It's simple. It's easy to explain to a novice. And pretty balanced. Less
> > classes.
>
> Thats's just a lot of baloney. So what are you proposing to do with
> all the cars you leave out of the stock classes? Lumping them all in
> one (or two) ST classes won't work. You'd have tons of different level
> cars and many different degrees of preparation to take care there. So
> you'd have to create a new slate of ST classes, this time taking into
> account preparation levels. So more classes, more complication.
>
> All of you people thinking about this time limit business, I'd ask you
> to think about it from outsied your solo-insider perspective. Solo is
> a grassroots motorsport. If it goes away from that it'll be crippled.
>
> As other people have already mentioned, I'm actually offended to these
> proposals. I know that the people making them mean no disrespect, but
> I feel like me and many other plain autocrossers matter very little.
>
> --
> Ignasi.
--
Ron N. - Dalton, GA http://www.pchacker.org/
90 SHO http://www.v6sho.com/
84 300zxt http://www.zxfiles.net/
IZCC #4779
/// unsubscribe/change address requests to majordomo@autox.team.net or try
/// http://www.team.net/mailman/listinfo
/// Partial archives at http://www.team.net/archive
|