> The dual-purpose concept is why the Solo II rules allow IT (and A Sedan)
> cars to run in SP. Such accommodations don't threaten anyone with a real
> SP car. If they did, you'd see everybody who's serious about SP building
> IT cars. It's an open question as to why the road racing side doesn't
> make similar concessions to cars prepped to Solo II rules.
>
One issue is the safety gear required for road race rules. Solo2 rules
don't require the cage, window net, fire extinguisher, harnesses, kill
switch, etc. You could consider allowing SP cars with the required safety
equipment, but that would totally change IT and drive the costs way up.
Aftermarket fuel injection and engine management systems are quite
expensive. Wide wheels and tires are also more expensive. SP allows tires
to stick out beyond the bodywork, but this would permit the dangerous
possibility of touching tires in a road race.
Now Solo I does allow SP cars to compete as long as they have a Solo I
approved roll bar or cage and the other safety gear. And they are way
faster than their IT counterparts. I have done a couple of Solo I events on
a track and watched some hillclimb Solo I events, and I remember in
particular some well-prepared CSP CRXes which were way faster than the
well-prepared ITA CRXes.
Brad Burns
|