autox
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: SP/SM and costs

To: "Ron Chapman" <CHAPMANR@calbt.com>, <autox@autox.team.net>
Subject: Re: SP/SM and costs
From: "Phil Ethier" <pethier@isd.net>
Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2001 21:10:32 -0500
-----Original Message-----
From: Ron Chapman <CHAPMANR@calbt.com>
To: autox@autox.team.net <autox@autox.team.net>
Date: Thursday, April 26, 2001 5:08 PM
Subject: SP/SM and costs


>Some of the posts on this issue show a belief that SM is an affordable
class.  My opinion is that it may be so only as long as remains smog legal
and isn't a national class.

Quite.

>Sure, some of the SM mods give a lot of bang for the buck and are popular
mods on street cars (subframe connectors, camshafts).  But, since it isn't a
national class, the truly inventive and serious national competitors aren't
building anything for it yet.  But if and when they do, be ready for some
serious, high dollar machinery.

If they are allowed both open induction rules and open camshaft rules, be
ready for some serious grenade engines.  Can't aford to use up engines like
Dixie Cups?

>I have nothing against SM or adding classes if the participation is there.
But, absent a spec formula, any idea of creating an "affordable" class which
allows considerable modifications to stock cars is doomed if it is a) a
national class, and/or  b) drops smog legality.


You are right on the money.

Phil Ethier    Saint Paul  Minnesota  USA
1970 Lotus Europa, 1992 Saturn SL2, 1986 Suburban, 1962 Triumph TR4 CT2846L
LOON, MAC   pethier@isd.net     http://www.mnautox.com/
Daughter Amanda has presented us with a second grandchild.  Sirena Mae
Stremski
arrived on the first day of Spring 2001, weighing 7 pounds 3 ounces.

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>