autox
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [evolution-disc.] Shock Debate Summary and Suggestion

To: Rick Cone <rickcone@bellsouth.net>, autox@autox.team.net,
Subject: Re: [evolution-disc.] Shock Debate Summary and Suggestion
From: Mark Darby <markds33@yahoo.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2002 07:49:41 -0800 (PST)
Hello,
 I was saving my opinion for my letter(s) to the SCCA,
then I saw this post and had to contribute my 2 cents.
 As a G Stock runner I have to contradict the
statement below. My preference is actually ONLY "A".
 Not only because I have the Pro Parts double
adjustable Koni's, but also for a much less self
serving reason.
 In 1999 I saw a Vw, which was believed to be on stock
shocks (struts), roll over while I was working course.

 If no one has brought it up yet, aftermarket
"dampeners" are, Im my opinion, a SAFETY item. As tire
manufacturers keep comming out with R compound tires
that have more grip, I think we will see more and more
cars roll over if we do not allow aftermarket
dampeners.
 I also believe that,in trying to save members money,
the SCCA would have a higher "financial risk factor"
due to my percieved increased frequency of roll overs.
 As competitors,sometimes we just have to anty up!
Mark Darby
#33 G Stock




 
> A) Leave things as they are now.
> B) Ban Upside Downers and External Reservoirs
> C) B. and Single Adjustments (current Fastrack)
> D) 1/4'' variance of custom shocks
> E) OEM only.
> 
> Now if we take a general look at who is making what
> comments and I think we
> have a pattern:
> 
> <This is only an observed observation>
> 
> > DS,GS,HS from what I see, seem to like option C or
> E.
Try FREE Yahoo! Mail - the world's greatest free email!

///  unsubscribe/change address requests to majordomo@autox.team.net  or try
///  http://www.team.net/mailman/listinfo
///  Partial archives at http://www.team.net/archive


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