Smokerbros@aol.com wrote:
>
> Are you proposing that both ends have free swaybars? If so, are you ready to
> put a 1.75" bar on the front and a 1.25" bar on the rear to increase the
> spring rates and make your car handle great?
I thought he meant to allow one end of the car or the other, but not
both. I would favor that.
> I guarantee there will be
> someone who will go to Speedway Engineering and build **$800 worth of swaybars
> to make it handle better, then put it on a trailer so they don't have to
> drive it on the street.
**This to go along with the existing $1000 to $1700 (as reported in this
list) necessary for special shocks to be competitive in stock class?
Let's eliminate the shady-at-best 'reservoir shocks' that supplement a
stock cars spring rates :-)
Want to eliminate lots of protests? Require STOCK FACTORY SHOCKS on all
stock cars - presto - no more spring perch problems, and a much more
even playing field for all.
---------------- Added Opinion Alert -------------------
The original rule was written when front drive cars were either
non-competitive or otherwise not a consideration.
I disagree that the 'either end sway bar' change would negate to any
great degree current classifications ("the sky is falling, the sky is
falling") while this sorts itself out. Some front engine/rear drive cars
would also be helped with a rear bar change. It would add some influence
to what exists now, but no more than adding a new car or two to existing
classes.
As we all know, there are maybe one, two, or three top cars in any class
anyway, so I suggest the effect would be minimal. Who would REALLY worry
would be those who have the current "hot" car and find themselves with
some competition :-)
Let's update this rule. Try it for one year at the local level, gather
accurate data, make a decision.
Scott Meyers
240SX DS->ES......could use a bigger rear bar :-)
|