land-speed
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: Aerodynamics Vs. time slips

To: "Richard Fox" <v4gr@rcn.com>, <land-speed@autox.team.net>
Subject: RE: Aerodynamics Vs. time slips
From: "Russel Mack" <rtmack@concentric.net>
Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2003 17:22:42 -0600
Touche', Richard.  I understood very well that I was leaving myself open.
Russ, #1226B

-----Original Message-----
From: Richard Fox [mailto:v4gr@rcn.com]
Sent: Sunday, January 26, 2003 4:12 PM
To: land-speed@autox.team.net
Cc: RTMACK@concentric.net
Subject: Re: Aerodynamics Vs. time slips



: Re: Aerodynamics Vs. time slips


> In a message dated 1/25/2003 12:09:02 PM Pacific Standard Time,
> rtmack@concentric.net writes:
>
> << o me there is an important difference between choosing an "oddball"
racing
>  class (with an open record because nobody else cares) and setting a new
>  record at... say... 32mph-- and choosing a more "mainstream" class that
(for

I agree 100%. We should do away with all the "oddball" classes such as
V4F/FMR and G/GR and XOB/GAlt that nobody cares about. As proof that no one
cares about them, none of these records is now or has ever been held by a
Camaro.
I suggest that the meet could be speeded up and the rule book made shorter
by limiting entrees to SBC/C and BBC/C  That's Small Block Chevy/Camaro and
Big Block Chevy/Camaro. Entrees will be required to state if they used
Summit or Jegs for their parts.
I hope this suggestion is met with a good response and the oddball's can
just pick up and start their own timing association.

///  unsubscribe/change address requests to majordomo@autox.team.net  or try
///  http://www.team.net/mailman/listinfo
///  Archives at http://www.team.net/archive/land-speed
///  what is needed.  It isn't that difficult, folks.


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