> >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.
> >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.
>
> I don't agree. Maybe it needed to be re-classed, but the ACR was a
> legitimate factory-built standard model car. It was widely
available at
> dealerships across the country. It was not rare or expensive.
>
> I think all the manufacturers should have had the incentive to build
such
> cars, and make them available to the general public, just the way
the ACR
> was indeed available to the general public. The "Trunk kit" was a
bad idea.
> Tell the makers to build better cars!
>
> I want to see more enthusiast-oriented cars. And I don't mean
> limited-edition megabucks cars.
>
> Phil Ethier Saint Paul Minnesota USA
> Lotus Europa, VW Quantum Syncro, Chev Suburban
> LOON, TCVWC, MAC
> pethier@isd.net http://www.visi.com/mac/
I completely agree...My question would be what if the original ACR had
been the Neon GTS, R/T, or GT? I don't think those terms would have
inspired as much controversy as "American Club Racing".
===
Derek Engelhaupt
'97 White Mazda Miata
St. Paul, MN
What if there were no hypothetical situations?
-- Andrew Kohlsmith
|