"Jeff Lloyd" <Jeff@cyberconceptz.com> wrote:
> It does sound like a really silly rule..
Uhh, yeah. That's why we spent so much time and effort to come up with it,
and why we _continue_ to spend time and effort revisiting and improving the
rules.
Just because you don't understand it, doesn't mean that it's "silly".
> ummm ok.. Yuck Yuck, Now where is the turnup truck I just fell off of?
You tell me. It's your turnip truck.
> want to explain the logic behind that? please!
> I understand the rule just not why...
In general, a 2-seater car will be smaller and lighter than a 4-seater car.
Not because of the seats, but because of all the sheet metal and other
structure that has to contain those seats. Given that the target audience
for SM is primarily 4-seaters, by disallowing 2-seaters we wind up with a
larger average size and heavier average weight, which keeps the playing
field more level.
However, there are a couple of oddball exceptions out there that squeeze 4
seats into a 2-seater-sized structure. Those cars are thus excepted from
the "4-seat" rule, because while they have 4 seats, they're substancially
smaller/lighter than other "real" 4-seaters.
Then, there are cars that are just so expensive from the get-go, that to
allow them into the class and have them become "the car to have" would be
counterproductive to class growth. SM at the highest levels may be
expensive, but getting in the door should be reasonably cheap. Porsches,
Ferraris et al are not cheap cars, especially not once you start modifying
them.
One of the prime purposes behind SM is to give everyone a more-or-less
equal shot at being competitive. So far, that has worked very, very well.
Now that we have proved out (more or less) the existing SM class, we're
going to ask the SEB for a second class -> "SM for 2-seaters" or maybe "SM
for everyone else not already allowed in SM" There certainly seems to be
enough demand, but there is also a noticable lack of interest from anyone
who might champion this other than me (and as I don't really care if it
gets created or not, finding a champion for this new class would be a
really really good idea for those who want to see it created) At this time
last year, I thought we might need 3 SM classes (SM classic to be split
into 2: "SM Fast" and "SM Slow") but it appears that we don't need to do
that just yet, if at all. SM is doing just fine as it sits right now.
DG
|