I am disappointed as well that many perceive the sky as falling so the
solution is to go to the bomb shelter.
The contexts of past conversations were regarding driveline u/b not being
allowed, either explicitly or implicitly - not complete removal of all
pieces/parts u/b (see control arm reference below). That's what you're
missing. Reference the Feb. FastTrack - if I recall, references drivelines
specifically...
Note that I admit I'm blatantly biased here. There will be one or more car
that is the desired car for a class. Whether that is the Civic or not is
irrelevant. People will build cars to the letter of the rules. Even with
the 'warning shot' about driveline u/b - the implication was that other u/b
would still be allowed, so our investments would not be lost.
I _still_ don't believe that u/b should be changed. If anything, the STAC
needs to create its own grouping of cars that allow this. Then, the
complaints about SP changes affecting ST would go away. Is there an STAC
position available? I'll volunteer.
Kevin McCormick
'88 STS Civic
-----Original Message-----
From: Andy Hollis [mailto:awhollis@swbell.net]
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2003 10:21 AM
To: ktm@Unify.Com
Cc: autox@autox.team.net; evolution-discussions@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [evolution-disc.] Please comment on the August Fastrack
Kevin,
I am disappointed in you. You knew this was on the table when you and I
discussed it at last year's Nats before you built the car. Your answer to
me was essentially "no worries, we'll just put all the parts onto a
different shell. The base model Civic body was super cheap".
To try and take the high road now stings. What am I missing?
--Andy
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ktm@unify.com [mailto:ktm@unify.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2003 12:09 PM
> To: Stand0nIt@aol.com; bfitz@cox.net; awhollis@swbell.net; seb@scca.org
> Cc: autox@autox.team.net; evolution-discussions@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: RE: [evolution-disc.] Please comment on the August Fastrack
>
>
> Of course, I'm on the opposite side of this fence - we have (based on the
> current rules) spent time, effort, and $$ on building a car to
> the letter of
> the rules. The all or nothing is, IHMO of course :-), too far If you buy
> into the need to limit the U/B at all.
>
> Take, for example, our use of '88 rear control arms with not-inexpensive
> shocks. This would suddenly be ruled illegal. Those shocks _only_ fit the
> '88 control arms (as well as Integra Type-R's). Talk about a
> bad taste in
> my mouth. As would the gauge cluster that has a tach in it. And so on.
>
> Imagine the protests that would come out of this - wrong year door panel,
> ashtray, center console..(Pseudo kidding).
>
>
> Kevin McCormick
> '88 STS Civic
>
>
>
> Kevin McCormick
> Unify Corp. Technical Support
> ktm@unify.com
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stand0nIt@aol.com [mailto:Stand0nIt@aol.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2003 9:08 AM
> To: bfitz@cox.net; awhollis@swbell.net; seb@scca.org
> Cc: autox@autox.team.net; evolution-discussions@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [evolution-disc.] Please comment on the August Fastrack
>
> Nicely done Brian...
>
> I would agree that this works best, currently the SEB seems dead
> set on all
> or none, a position I can see, For the record, I like this option best.
>
> Heyward Wagner
> Team Underdog Racing
> 91 Honda Civic Si (STS)
> 91 Toyota MR2 (SOLD!!)
> 02 Toyota Tundra
> www.teamunderdog.com
/// 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
|