Jay Mitchell <jemitchell@compuserve.com> wrote:
> >(How many of the other responders are actually
> > involved in this class?)
>
> Doesn't matter so much as you assume. It's relevant to anyone who has
> considered building a Prepared car (I have, but I'm not gonna do it
> now).
Good point - - but there has been little response to the request
for input from the SCCA, so I would have to say to those in
consideration of a P car to get involved - - write a letter!! (And
not just to this forum).
> > If the powers-to-be would only give us FP back (as has
> > been promised and given lip service for years now,
>
> FP has only been combined with AP for three years. How many "years" has
> the alleged lip service been given? It can't possibly be very many.
Three years, ever since the merger - - at the impound of the 1997 Nationals
a petition was signed by all 19 drivers in the "new" AP,
and 3 APL drivers(including the Babb's, BTW). When that was
presented, we were told that it was already under discussion. That,
sir, constitutes years of lip service - - 3 to be exact!! Then they
simply added 40lbs to the Lotii. It was those actions that prompted all the
EM cars last year from the AP class, and other people that did not enter
their cars, although they attended the Nationals.
> > Let's look at the "old FP".
>
> What's this about? The car that won AP this year would be in FP if you
> got what you're asking for. So would (probably) the car that came in
> second. How much could restoring FP posssibly do to improve over what
> happened this year?
There was a size limit to the 911's in FP, and there were no M3's
(there were 318/321 I's, if I recall) Now you are making me dig
in my Riley's closet for a rulebook 4 or 5 years old (but I do have
it!!).
> > I don't even find it strange that all the AP protests this year
> > were by drivers that came from the old FP class cars. They,
> > IMO are in a fight for equality, and the 914-6 or RX-7 that
> > the protestors were driving WERE outclassed by an RSR
> > powered by a race prepared 3.8.
>
> Irrelevant. See above. You'd STILL have to run against those cars (911s
> were all in FP before the classes were combined).
Again, I don't recall FP being all 911's, just those that were a certain
engine size. Even if they were all allowed in 1996, they could be ruled out
just like the V8's are certain to be.
I will have to check on the 911's, memory fades when you are an
Old Fartz!!
>
> > I know these guys, I think
> > they may have been protesting the rules, and the classing,
> > more than they were the drivers or the particular car.
>
> If that's so, I think there are far more effective ways to make that
> point. But that's just me.
>
> > Congratulations to the Fordahl's. You have simply used the
> > same rules that I have for years to get into Prepared (a 2.3
> > Quad 4 in a Fiero - legal in GT-2), and done so legally. You
> > have driven this legal-by-the-rules car extremely well, and you
> > have justly earned your title.
>
> We are in complete agreement here.
Anybody with a National Championship deserves to be congratulated, if it
came easy we all would be Champs.. If there
are any classing or rule adjustments to be made, so be it - - next
year. But I think that the Fordahl's should be given their just due - - and
the business at hand should take nothing away from that victory!!
G
|