David Onate <crzydave@san.rr.com> wrote:
>> Not to mention that STU is a DOT tire class.
> which I interpret as meaning you can use your Kuhmos.. or BFG's or hooisers
> or whatever
Yup. "DOT" as opposed to Prepared/Modified "slicks"
>> You can make 500HP - can you use
> 500 hp out of a 3.1l engine that's smog legal?!?! That's really pushing it.
Well, "smog legal" is as "smog legal" does. Some states (CA) have
ultra-restrictive emissions laws that can't help but hurt performance, other
states don't give a fig _what_ you do to the car.
So what constitutes a "smog legal" car varies widely depending on where you
live, which really means the rule is unenforcable in a National context.
The STU Proposal currently in front of the SEB
(http://autocross.dsm.org/stu.html) eliminates the emissions requirement while
retaining the requirement that the vehicle be street registered - and explicitly
states that emissions/street legality (aside from the "required equipment" rule
STU.1C - which I now see should have an "operating" tagged onto it") is not
subject to protest.
How much of that wording - if any - will actually make it into the Official STU
rules remains to be seen. (There are liability & Risk Management issues to
consider)
> Too bad you HAVE to use pump gas
Says who?
Seems to me that, uhhh, 3.6.A says that Stock class vehicles have to use pump
gas, and 3.6.B states that everybody else gets to use whatever fuel they want.
STU.1.B would imply that STU gets to use race gas too - and I don't have a
problem with turbocharged cars running high octane fuel. In fact, a savvy SCCA
Solo Marketing Director could hook up with VP Fuels, and make something like VP
104 Performance Unleaded (which is a street legal, California-certified fuel)
into a class spec fuel. (Hint hint)
DG
|