autox
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: Stock class rules was (Re: Sequential Stock Classes)

To: "Phil Ethier" <pethier@isd.net>,
Subject: RE: Stock class rules was (Re: Sequential Stock Classes)
From: "Kevin Stevens" <Kevin_Stevens@Bigfoot.com>
Date: Sun, 9 Jul 2000 00:34:06 -0700
If you say so, but they haven't yet.  Lessee, I've bought stock Camaro wheels,
C4 wheels, and C5 wheels that I can think of off the bat.  They were
consistently 1/3 to 1/2 the price of good used race wheels.

That being said, the removal of the non-stock wheel allowance wasn't my
particular albatross, I was the front sway bar guy.  Wheels don't make it harder
to predict, prepare, and classify new cars - the sway bar allowance does.

KeS

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Phil Ethier [mailto:pethier@isd.net]
> Sent: Sunday, July 09, 2000 00:09
> To: Kevin Stevens; jcgz3@hotmail.com; rex_tener@yahoo.com;
> kevin_stevens@Bigfoot.com; Ghsharp@aol.com
> Cc: autox@autox.team.net
> Subject: Re: Stock class rules was (Re: Sequential Stock Classes)
>
>
> From: Kevin Stevens <kevin_stevens@hotmail.com>
>
>
> >> > Eliminate 13.4 wheel allowance.
> >>Why?  Why is it bad to allow aftermarket wheel flexibility?
> >
> >Cost, I'd imagine.  Don't all cars come with at least one set of stock
> >wheels these days?
>
> Yes.  And the second set for your race tires will probably cost more than
> the aftermarket wheels.
>
>
> Phil Ethier    Saint Paul  Minnesota  USA
> 1970 Lotus Europa, 1992 Saturn SL2, 1986 Chev Suburban
> LOON, MAC   pethier@isd.net     http://www.mnautox.com/
> "If I can do it, it's not art"  - Red Green
>
>
>


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>