autox
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Chrysler Taking its toys and going home???

To: scavenger@eol-online.com, autox@autox.team.net
Subject: Re: Chrysler Taking its toys and going home???
From: Scott R Sawyer <reddog_es22@juno.com>
Date: Sun, 22 Aug 1999 02:31:26 -0400
I've read an awful lot of posts on this of late, and I think I fall into
the school of thought that says the real problem goes back to allowing
the ACR into SS racing. No finger pointing at either of the parties
involved, but I think this is where the everything started going
downhill. One note, these "facts" are things I've picked up from others
posts, so I'm trusting others for my info.
Until the ACR, the cars that were raced in SS were the same model that
was sold to the general public. The problem I have with the ACR is that
it was built as a race package. No one really needs Koni's (an
AFTERMARKET component) on the street {but they are fun : ) }. For those
of us in the Solo community, this isn't a big issue because we can add
them, but when it comes to SS, it gave the Neon's levels of adjustability
not available to the other vehicles. I would hate to be the driver trying
to tune out the understeer most front drivers come with through tire
pressures, while the Neon driver just pulls out his handy dandy
adjustment knob and makes a few changes. Why was this allowed to happen?
I don't know. My problem with DC is the way they handled the pull out. If
I were a Neon driver, I would feel betrayed. You buy the car with the
belief that you will have factory support, then they turn around and yank
everything in the middle of the season. I think DC would have been much
better served by announcing their intentions to leave after the season,
but this wouldn't have made the splash they got with the mid- season
move. 
Solution? I have no idea at tis point. Things are so screwed up in SS
racing I don't know what they can do to salvage it. I do a fair amount of
corner working, and as much as I love the sound of a GT1 car at full
throttle, it was kind of cool when the SS cars were ao course. Lots of
body roll, squeelin' tires, and (relatively) inexpensive. Now they are
starting to becoming more and more like IT cars. 
I think we kind of agree on the issue of allowing aftermarket parts, we
just disagree on when this started happening.

Scott Sawyer
'91 Civic Si, ES 22
Team Underdog Racing, Underdog F&C
SCCA

On Sun, 22 Aug 1999 01:45:35 -0400 "Gregory S. Croft"
<scavenger@eol-online.com> writes:
>Cheesy? Thats kind of a remedial remark. Chrysler produced the ACR 
>neons on
>the same lines as all the other neons, and now for Manufacturer A to 
>bitch
>and complain is absurd.
>It reall is quite simple.. Build a better car, or come up with more
>competitive factory package.
>Chrysler has been battling the SCCA on this for quite some time now,
>honestly I wonder why they hadn't moved on it sooner.
>
>I think the Saturn Performance Systems ad's sum it up best..
>"Surprise! Saturns are winning in National Club Racing. And our SCCA
>approved suspension and brake package is just one of the reasons". 
>Simply
>put, relying on aftermarket components to be competitive doesn't seem 
>all
>that stock to me.
>
>Besides, its not the first time Mopar has been pushed out of 
>motorsports due
>to dominance, but I won't get into that.
>
>Maybe we should rename the classed to NSSB or NSSC.. As in N.ot S.o 
>S.tock.
>Honestly, I feel if your going to allow modifications, then all
>modifications should be allowed on all cars. I know, thats what IT 
>and
>Touring are for, but that is why we have *stock* classes isn't it?
>
>Ah well... looks like I'll be going to IT or something.
>
>Greg Croft -Now wearing my flame retardent suit-
>-98 Neon Sport, DS
>-95 Neon ACR, SSC
>http://www.detroitneonowners.org/
>
>PS: My comments are not a rip on Saturn or SPS. Just used their ad as 
>an
>example.


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