At 10:14 AM 8/1/00 -0400, Bob Lang wrote:
>I'm not defending any logic here, but the idea behind the production
>classes is that they are production based. Allowing swaps for alternate
>parts leads to all sorts of "interpretations", and I think they're trying
>to avoid that particular outcome (no offense meant to any "rules
>interpreters" out there.)
What makes it particularly unfair, though, is that other cars in the class
(E/Prod) are allowed to swap diffs. At least that's my understanding.
Please correct me if I'm wrong.
>Now, if SCCA adopted the correct notion that virtually every other rules
>racing body in the US and possibly the world that the V8 based Ford rears
>(for example) are a satisfactory substitute for the original production
>parts and made the rule strict enough to disallow changes in track or
>wheelbase - then they could just move on (instead of endlessly debate the
>issue).
That would be a simple elegant solution.
>My personal opinion is that SCCA is basically wrong in this regard. They
>allow alternate transmissions in Prod classes (lots of folks seem to use
>Jericho), so they should allow alternate rears.
..and I agree for the same reason.
John Lye
rjl6n@Virginia.edu
|