Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*10\s+year\s+Maximum\s+Age\s+for\s+Stock\s+Class\s+\(was\s+Reclassing\)\s*$/: 22 ]

Total 22 documents matching your query.

1. Re: 10 year Maximum Age for Stock Class (was Reclassing) (score: 1)
Author: "Leland F Nichols" <Lee.Nichols@morpho.com>
Date: Wed, 1 May 2002 13:00:27 -0500
maximum Age of Stock half the O.E. Parts are not Eeek! I hope you weren't serious with this proposal. You just eliminated all pre-'92 cars from Stock, and just eliminated me from autocrossing. I jus
/html/autox/2002-05/msg00007.html (9,222 bytes)

2. Re: 10 year Maximum Age for Stock Class (was Reclassing) (score: 1)
Author: "Alan Pozner" <apozner@ptd.net>
Date: Wed, 1 May 2002 14:18:46 -0400
I don't care whether its Stock class or Street Prepared or Modified, I think 9 is too young to be driving in an autocross. Of course its ok if you are in a Jr. Kart. Regards, Alan /// unsubscribe/cha
/html/autox/2002-05/msg00009.html (8,400 bytes)

3. Re: 10 year Maximum Age for Stock Class (was Reclassing) (score: 1)
Author: "Jim Mistick" <jimmistick@hotmail.com>
Date: Wed, 01 May 2002 21:19:50 +0000
So the discussion is that if I spend a couple thousand dollars to restore my 1975 280Z to factory condition (like I'm planning) I'm not able to run in it stock? What is the reasoning behind that? Who
/html/autox/2002-05/msg00014.html (9,558 bytes)

4. Re: 10 year Maximum Age for Stock Class (was Reclassing) (score: 1)
Author: Stefanv@aol.com
Date: Wed, 1 May 2002 20:24:05 EDT
I don't often speak up here but... I don't understand what you are trying to accomplish with this aside from making a lot of people angry at you? Are you trying to boost the economy? Are you a car sa
/html/autox/2002-05/msg00017.html (8,874 bytes)

5. Re: 10 year Maximum Age for Stock Class (was Reclassing) (score: 1)
Author: Alan Dahl <adahl@eskimo.com>
Date: Wed, 1 May 2002 18:20:23 -0700
The problem that folks are trying to solve is that these days it takes $5000+ to prep a car to run in Stock category at a National level, once you've bought the expensive double-adjustable shocks, ex
/html/autox/2002-05/msg00018.html (11,823 bytes)

6. Re: 10 year Maximum Age for Stock Class (was Reclassing) (score: 1)
Author: "Rick Cone aka ConeKiller" <rickcone@bellsouth.net>
Date: Wed, 1 May 2002 21:56:05 -0400
Perhaps automobiles that don't have verifiable documentation anymore? And non-available parts from the factory anymore? If there are no specs and you can't get originals, how do you prove legality? S
/html/autox/2002-05/msg00019.html (10,463 bytes)

7. Re: 10 year Maximum Age for Stock Class (was Reclassing) (score: 1)
Author: diane lapusnak <fstockracers@mindspring.com>
Date: Wed, 01 May 2002 22:23:28 -0400
You can make a car competitive for far less than that... Don't kid yourself... Dan Popp won the Ft. Meyers Tour with stock shocks on a Z06. (you know, one of those cars that has to have a set of Pens
/html/autox/2002-05/msg00020.html (10,400 bytes)

8. Re: 10 year Maximum Age for Stock Class (was Reclassing) (score: 1)
Author: Stefanv@aol.com
Date: Thu, 2 May 2002 00:26:23 EDT
OK, thanks for clearing up some of the motivations behind this idea. I can't say as I agree with much of it myself. As someone who has never owned a new car... nor do I see myself owning a new car an
/html/autox/2002-05/msg00027.html (10,042 bytes)

9. Re: 10 year Maximum Age for Stock Class (was Reclassing) (score: 1)
Author: Randy Noll <rnoll98@yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 1 May 2002 22:49:51 -0700 (PDT)
Decent condition '91 NA MR2: $4,500 Crash bolts: $8 Koni singles: $600 Sway bar: $150 4 Hoosiers: $750 Having a car with the potential to win a national championship for less money than another guy's
/html/autox/2002-05/msg00030.html (10,762 bytes)

10. Re: 10 year Maximum Age for Stock Class (was Reclassing) (score: 1)
Author: Kevin Stevens <kevin_stevens@pursued-with.net>
Date: Wed, 1 May 2002 23:17:41 -0700
You miss the point. How many of those people HAVE that particular car just because it is presently the car for the class? How many would be changing cars within three years anyway if the classificati
/html/autox/2002-05/msg00034.html (10,868 bytes)

11. Re: 10 year Maximum Age for Stock Class (was Reclassing) (score: 1)
Author: Bob Pariza <bpariza@yahoo.com>
Date: Thu, 2 May 2002 03:48:50 -0700 (PDT)
The beauty of autocross is that the driver is a major portion (like 90%) of the combination. Why would we want to force the least important part of the equation to require additional investment. Besi
/html/autox/2002-05/msg00037.html (11,246 bytes)

12. Re: 10 year Maximum Age for Stock Class (was Reclassing) (score: 1)
Author: "Rick Cone" <rickcone@bellsouth.net>
Date: Thu, 2 May 2002 10:21:42 -0400
Nope, just scared some guys old POS will be fully restored, and exploiting the fact that there are no documentation about his computer, cam profiles, or injector flow rates, and that competitor will
/html/autox/2002-05/msg00043.html (12,570 bytes)

13. Re: 10 year Maximum Age for Stock Class (was Reclassing) (score: 1)
Author: David Hillman <hillman@planet-torque.com>
Date: Thu, 2 May 2002 11:38:27 -0400 (EDT)
Alan Dahl wrote... So let me get this straight; the problem is that buying an older, say $5K, car like mine, and spending $5K to prep it ( which is triple the required budget as Randy Noll pointed ou
/html/autox/2002-05/msg00047.html (11,438 bytes)

14. Re: 10 year Maximum Age for Stock Class (was Reclassing) (score: 1)
Author: Ignasi Palou-Rivera <palou@highstream.net>
Date: Thu, 2 May 2002 11:49:18 -0400
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 differe
/html/autox/2002-05/msg00051.html (11,452 bytes)

15. re: 10 year Maximum Age for Stock Class (was Reclassing) (score: 1)
Author: David Hillman <hillman@planet-torque.com>
Date: Thu, 2 May 2002 12:09:16 -0400 (EDT)
Kevin Stevens wrote... How many of those people HAVE that particular car just because it is presently one of the cheapest competitive cars? "What? A cheap competitive car? We can't have that! Let's m
/html/autox/2002-05/msg00052.html (10,766 bytes)

16. Re: 10 year Maximum Age for Stock Class (was Reclassing) (score: 1)
Author: Ron Nottingham <nottingham@alltel.net>
Date: Thu, 02 May 2002 12:22:06 -0400
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
/html/autox/2002-05/msg00055.html (12,733 bytes)

17. Re: 10 year Maximum Age for Stock Class (was Reclassing) (score: 1)
Author: Randy Noll <rnoll98@yahoo.com>
Date: Thu, 2 May 2002 09:37:52 -0700 (PDT)
No, the point is people are talking about a blanket rule to "fix" a "problem" that can easily be dealt with by the SEB (and is in many ways) in how they class cars. This allows for subjectivity and
/html/autox/2002-05/msg00056.html (10,467 bytes)

18. Re: 10 year Maximum Age for Stock Class (was Reclassing) (score: 1)
Author: "Patrick Washburn" <washburn@dwave.net>
Date: Thu, 2 May 2002 12:21:07 -0500
To re-iterate what someone has already said, I would hope to see this as National event classing rules only. To do this at the regional level would IMO be insane. Maybe that adds a layer of complexit
/html/autox/2002-05/msg00062.html (10,651 bytes)

19. Re: 10 year Maximum Age for Stock Class (was Reclassing) (score: 1)
Author: "Alan Pozner" <apozner@ptd.net>
Date: Thu, 2 May 2002 13:42:26 -0400
One final word and I will shut up. Having two structures for National and Regional SOLO II will drive the SCCA out of the grassroots autocross business. In our area we are coming under increasing pre
/html/autox/2002-05/msg00064.html (12,375 bytes)

20. Re: 10 year Maximum Age for Stock Class (was Reclassing) (score: 1)
Author: "Mark J. Andy" <marka@telerama.com>
Date: Thu, 2 May 2002 13:50:31 -0400 (EDT)
No need to apologize. The 10 year rule is idiocy. From the way it looks, Dave floated it as an idea and it was stated as such. I suspect by now that he's gotten enough feedback to know it wouldn't b
/html/autox/2002-05/msg00066.html (9,381 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu