David, Can you read? I clearly stated that I have no problem with the V6 in
CS! I have problems with the flawed logic from Mr. Bettencourt that states
why the 1.6 Miata was moved, simple. He just resent me a rebuttal and stated
that my statement was incorrect except from the big picture. I was trying to
respond to his so called big picture because he previously stated that I he
was looking at the forest and we were focusing on the trees (Not seeing the
big picture) His big picture is out of focus.
Again AB stated the following:
<Dan,
<The 1.6 was moved not simply to have more cars in the class. That
statement is
<true when looking at the big picture. The big picture being that this SEB
<wanted an 'affordable sports car class' for the membership to have the
option of
<runniing in. The 1.6 was put in there to 'freshen up' the mix of cars as
the
<majority got older and older. Simple.
<AB
Freshening up a mix of cars should NOT be the intent of a classing decision.
Performance should be. He also previously stated that there was NOT a
difference of a full class in performance.
NOTE: the following is on a separate topic, the 4 cylinder Fiero's classing,
a subject championed by George Ryan
The 4 cylinder is a different issue. It's a pig for E stock, Again simple.
I feel that the SCCA does a great job and that we cannot all expect to not
have better suited or worse suited cars in a class. I just feel that they
should be similar in capabilities.
I'm glad that you feel that the Fiero 4 cylinder is a sports car, too bad
your opinion is incorrect. A front end slightly tweaked from a chevette and
a citation front end used in the rear wrapped in a plastic body on unibody
that weighs 400-450 lbs too much is not a sports car. The number of seats is
not the defining characteristic of a sports car.
I guess that you just can't differentiate 2 issues being discussed in a
single email. Next time I'll send two messages so that you won't get
confused.
Dan
-----Original Message-----
From: David Hawkins <otgrouch@twosrus.com>
To: Dan Morency <DMorency@gwi.net>; autox <autox@autox.team.net>
Date: Monday, July 17, 2000 11:55 AM
Subject: Re: re fiero reclassing
>>Mr. Bettencourt admits that there is not a classes difference in the cars
>>and states that they were moved to increase the numbers of cars available
>to
>>run the class. Am I the only person that finds this logic flawed?
>
>Several people have found fault with this logic and provided very good
>reasons
>that the car belongs in CS. I'm one of the people who feels it was a good
>move even if you skip demographics.
>
>>Miata light (2200) and 130? HP can we see where they don't fit since the
>1.8
>>Miata's have seen a good fit in BS with only a few more hp (10?)
>
>Try 116HP for the 1.6 and you're on the mark. Now you're up to
>24HP....which
>I think it a fair amount on a car so light.
>
>>car than all of them listed above we can also assume a good suspension
>>system with great brakes.
>
>How is the 1.6 Miata newer than a MKII MR2, early 90s 924/944, or Gen2 RX7?
>You can assume a good suspension with good/great brakes on all of the above
>cars.
>
>>but separately class Miata's that are on the SAME unibody with only 10 hp
>>difference!
>
>I think this argument would go more in favor of saying that all MKI Miatas
>should
>be in CS than that the 1.6 should be in BS.
>
>>the 4cyl fiero is a different discussion. people see 2 seats and assume
>>sports car. It isn't, it was a commuter car with limited space and an
>>underpowered 4 cylinder.
>
>Did you ever work for GM? The Fiero was a sports car that they got past
>the bean counters by calling it a commuter car. Sure, they did wonders
with
>the parts bins (from a money standpoint....definitely not from a
performance
>standpoint), but that car evolved every year away from any definition of
>'commuter car' that you could come up with.
>
>>assume for example that PAX numbers have some validity at all how can we
>see
>>a BMW 3 series go from BS to GS?
>
>Because the 3 series was severly outclassed and fit better with GS?
>
>>A basic civic was moved from ES to HS...
>>why not the Fiero 4 cylinder?
>
>Why did you end your email like this after starting off by saying you don't
>care
>where the car is classed? Apparently your issue IS with the classing of
the
>Fiero.
>
>If what Fiero owners have been saying is true, that Fiero drivers got
>disgusted
>and left to run Fiero club events, then they have no one to blame but
>themselves.
>Things have a much better chance of changing if you make a valid argument
to
>the SEB and SCAC via letter or email. Get the FACTS (actual HP figures are
>helpful), write your letter, and see what happens.
>
>David Hawkins
>86 Mr2 CSP in pieces
>
|