>>> Lindsay Wilson <lwilson1@ford.com> wrote:
>So Eric I take it you don't think allowing all manufactures a cost effective
>means of
>participating in grassroots motorsports is something "SCCA" should do?
>Allowing
>trunk kits reduces development costs for Diamler-Chrysler as well. (More $ for
>contingency programs?)
>You seem to prefer one make racing, while I prefer a race between a variety of
>>contestants.
>Allowing Trunk kits is a method of getting more manufactures involved.
Contigency programs have nothing to do with rules. Period. Trunk kits *HAVE*
killed the philosophy of SS (SHOWROOM STOCK) racing. If Nissan decides they
want to make a trunk kit for the 200 SX SE-R with koni coil overs, full
urethane, and a turbo in the box, is that showroom stock? No. It's a bunch of
crap if you ask me. I commend chrylser's approach with the ACR, making a car
you can drive from the showroom to the track. Not with a stop at the garage on
the way. If MFRS want to participate in grassroots motorsports, more power to
them, but trunk kits are not the way to go about it my opinion. The SCCA has
made a big mistake in allowing them. My $0.02
Now where'd I put that factory Zastava trunk kit????????
:)
Scott Phelps
88 Yugo GVX EP
|