Your not kidding on the power to weight penalties for TR's. I had to add
20lbs to my GT-6 to be legal. My car is all steel and I made absolutely no
attempt and saving weight when building it. It is crazy that a tiny little
car like a Gt-6 has to weigh 2020lbs. It is also crazy what they do to the
Tr-6. Poor guys that run Tr-6's have to run the same power killing carbs the
Gt-6 does. They also have to weigh considerably more.
As far as there aren't enough TR's out there to have a say is not really
true. There are alot of Tr's out there. It may be time for TR folks to pull
together and lobby for our cars. List's like this could be a good way of
doing so.
Andy Stark
Very slow EP Gt-6
>From: "Robert Dardano" <19to1tr6@attbi.com>
>Reply-To: "Robert Dardano" <19to1tr6@attbi.com>
>To: "Rocky Entriken" <rocky@tri.net>, "andrew stark"
><whitedog72@hotmail.com>, <fot@autox.team.net>
>Subject: Re: Limited Prep (was Re: Prather retraction 2)
>Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2002 00:51:06 -0400
>
>Look were the miata is taking the scca from a few running not long ago to
>maybe 25% of the field at to days events and the fastest growing
>class.(sorry Lyn did not read yours first) Mazda has filled the North east
>and your right someting is gonna have to give The after market bolt on go
>fast stuff is aviable at wall mart . There are so few tr racers working for
>a national title and as far as lobbying for tec changes that would help
>the
>our cars come to be more competative. I think is non exsistant.( If you
>have'nt figured out i am talking threw my hat ) I'll bet power to weight
>increase costs to a tr owner are one of the highest in production, Oh
>well
>rob
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Rocky Entriken" <rocky@tri.net>
>To: "andrew stark" <whitedog72@hotmail.com>; <fot@autox.team.net>
>Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2002 3:05 PM
>Subject: Limited Prep (was Re: Prather retraction 2)
>
>
> > Andrew, thanks for that. Since I griped about the Prather comment in the
> > first place, I should say I very much appreciate your
> > comment/retraction/clarification.
> >
> > And then, moving on, you now raise a legitimate point of discussion.
>Perhaps
> > a bit in error regarding Prather, as his MGA is not limited prep.
>They've
> > been in the class since the late '70s. Mostly, I suspect, because even
>with
> > the 1622 engine, it was a slug that had all the suspension
>characteristics
> > of a brick. Prather's had his for decades, and is about the only person
>in
> > the country who's been able to make one quick. (I must admit a fondness
>for
> > the MGA, since the first car I ever drove in anger was my brother's.
>That's
> > when I came home and bought my own sports car. That was 1966. It
>happened
>to
> > be a Spitfire, same one I race today).
> >
> > But re Limited Prep, I am of two minds. First, I see it as the salvation
>of
> > Production, which was slowly dying for lack of new cars. We have been
>the
> > beneficiary of arrested development for years, decades even. The reason
>our
> > mid-'60s cars are still competitive is there are no new ones. If
>Standard
> > Triumph were still around and still building 1147 Spitfires, and Donald
> > Healey were still rolling 1098 Sprites out his door, our '64s would be
>in
>a
> > junkyard someplace because we'd be racing the superior 1997 or 2002
>models.
> > Name a sports car built in the '60s still built today: Corvette. Seen
>many
> > '60s models racing lately? So these new tintops coming into our classes
>from
> > I.T. at a limited level of prep are repopulating our dying classes and
> > giving them new life. This is good for Production. And eventually the
>normal
> > trends of evolution will hold sway and the newer cars will supplant the
> > older ones.
> >
> > But in the meantime, I still have a bit of problem with the execution of
>the
> > concept. The problem is that although the newer cars and the older ones
>are
> > doing similar lap times, and the older ones maybe even just a tad better
>for
> > a full lap, the characteristics of advantage vary sharply and tilt to
>the
> > limited-prep cars. My current example is a very nice limited-prep MGB I
>am
> > racing hereabouts, driven by a guy fairly new to the game but he drives
> > well. He does good lines, he races fairly, and I have had five good and
>fun
> > races with him this year. Problem is, he's won all five of them and
> > primarily for one reason: straightaway speed. The best race we had -- we
> > traded the lead four times -- nicely illustrated the problem.
> >
> > He has more raw speed. I have better handling. He is faster on the
> > straights. I am faster in the corners. The problem with that is, I get
>him
> > by a tenth or two on each corner to have maybe a second or two advantage
> > over an entire lap (I always outqualify him). His entire advantage comes
>in
> > one place, down the straightaway, where he can just drive by and then be
>in
> > front at the corner (four out of five races he won the drag race to turn
>1,
> > the fifth time I had pole and was able to hold the inside line). For me
>to
> > pass him, I have to work several laps to set him up, find an advantage,
> > wedge myself inside on a turn, try to get a good enough launch to hold
>him
> > off to the next corner, etc., etc., and if he drives a good line even if
>a
> > tenth slower there, the turn is his. OTOH, for him to pass me he needs
>only
> > to stay close enough coming onto the straight and then drive past with
>his
> > 1800cc to my 1147. Damn hard to "steal" a straightaway.
> >
> > For me to get him, I need him to make at least a tiny mistake. For
>example,
> > the best pass I did on him at Heartland Park was because he was taking a
> > defensive inside line at 6, so I took the "proper" line, got a good
>launch,
> > got up beside him, and was able to hold on all the way to 8. I still had
>a
> > nose inside his taillight, so was able to *complete* the pass there.
>Whew!
> > Was able to pull away a bit for a couple of laps, but then he just
>powered
> > up to me again, stayed close enough through the esses, and drove by on
>the
> > straight. I'll credit him this -- he still had to stay with me in the
>esses
> > and did a good job of it. But what I "won" in that pass was a road
>racing
> > moment. What he "won" on the straight was a drag race.
> >
> > We neither of us are top-line contenders in GP, but all of the other
>Limited
> > Preps I've raced so far -- a VW, two Datsun 510s -- all were the same
>way.
> > The V-Dub is awesome and will be a challenger to Prather. I haven't had
>the
> > opportunity to chase him through a corner yet. The 510s both hold me up
>in
> > turns and run away on the straights. The biggest disadvantage seems to
>be
> > that for some reason SCCA insists on starting our races on
>straightaways.
> > ;-) I don't know the solution -- more weight for them? -- but it is
> > something that IMHO must be addressed. However, I do believe it is
>necessary
> > to make the concept work, not dump it, because the latter will just
>leave
>us
> > right back in that spiral to oblivion.
> >
> > --Rocky Entriken
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "andrew stark" <whitedog72@hotmail.com>
> > To: <fot@autox.team.net>
> > Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2002 8:03 AM
> > Subject: Prather retraction 2
> >
> >
> > > For some reason my home PC fails to send text in hotmail. ;o(
> > > I wanted to say I have no issue with Prather himself. He is a talented
> > > mechanic and driver. I don't like the rules of the limited prep big
>bore
> > > cars in G and H production. It is not right to have 1800cc MGb's and
>MGA's
> > > etc... competing against small bore cars. Even with limited engine
> > > improvements and weight penalties there is a serious imbalance.
> > > Prather is fine. His car should be in a different class.
> > >
> > >
> > > _________________________________________________________________
> > > Join the worlds largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail.
> > > http://www.hotmail.com
_________________________________________________________________
MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos:
http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx
|