Mari L. Clements said:
>O.K., I think I'm missing something. I think that it is often
the case
>that it takes a year or two (or more) for people to figure out
the best
>set-ups for cars, and so the FIRST year a new car comes out, it
often isn't
>at its most competitive.
I'd go along with that 100%. When you can't buy shocks or front
bars for a car, your options for a successful Stock Solo II setup
are pretty limited. And even after those parts become available,
there's still usually lots of experimentation required to
optimize the car.
>It is true that all the first place trophy winners were driving
cars made
>in the '90s, but in that group, there was just one '98, one '96,
three
>'95s, two '94s, one '93, and one '91--and more than one of those
cars isn't
>even made anymore.
I'd claim further that your statistics establish the choices of
the trophy winners, not whether a "newer" car is really necessary
in order to be competitive. It's possible that older cars than
early '90s can still be competitive in Stock, but that the best
drivers have simply chosen to compete in newer ones.
Thanks for posting the stats, they're enlightening.
Jay "'52 model non-Stock autoxer in a '70 model non-Stock car"
Mitchell
|