The best marketing phrases PR people at SCCA can develop is "Speed Freakz"
and "Old Fartz"".
The most recent competitive adjustment to TR's in SCCA E Production is a
20# weight addition.
The stsndard "canned" response to safety requests is "not in the spirit of
The standard "canned" response" to lack of avaliable parts is "suitable
parts are available".
The winner of EP this year had nearly a FOUR second better lap time than
any (four cylinder) TR has ever turned on that track.
The winner of EP this year is a "LIFE" member of the comp Board and has
support from corporate Mazda.
I venture, there is not (nor can there be) a "competitive" TR in SCCA
From: Mark Palmer[SMTP:email@example.com]
Sent: Friday, October 30, 1998 12:50 PM
To: JWoesvra@AOL.COM; firstname.lastname@example.org; email@example.com;
firstname.lastname@example.org; email@example.com; firstname.lastname@example.org
Cc: Jensen87@AOL.COM; Uncledave7@AOL.COM; AlexanderJosephH@Waterloo.dee
re.com; email@example.com; firstname.lastname@example.org; email@example.com;
Subject: Re: FOT NewsFlash: Announcing SVRA TR/MG Challenge
Any car that is currently competitive on the national level in SCCA,
would seem inappropriate to me for the MG/TR Challenge. Sure, would
love to see it on display, or used as a pace car, or even for lunchtime
demonstration laps. But I'm opposed to having these in the Challenge
race (not just because it's a TR ... we have some currently competitive
MG's in SCCA, too).
>>In a message dated 98-10-28 08:31:43 EST, firstname.lastname@example.org writes:
>><< sorry but I don't know
>> Sam. I wonder , if in fact there is to be a MG vs TR feature race, if
>> perhaps these cars could enter if they weren't too radical?
>His Tr-6 is *rather* radical; he took the third place trophy in E-Prod
>at the Runoffs last year. The car is seriously fast!
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com