autox
[Top] [All Lists]

was: catch-all classe now BSM/SM2 can we also take a vote on a name???

To: <dg50@daimlerchrysler.com>
Subject: was: catch-all classe now BSM/SM2 can we also take a vote on a name???
From: "Jeff Lloyd" <Jeff@cyberconceptz.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2000 17:56:35 -0400
Thanks Dennis

Kent brought up a wonderful point in addition, instead of limiting Wheel
sizes limiting tire sizes
This is not only cost effective for SP converts, it allows more closely
controlling the parity and
It is safer! I would rather see a 205 tire stretched on a 9" rim then a 315
on an 8" rim.   Lets review

I said
> 3000 + lbs e.g. Corvette         9"+
> 2500 + lbs e.g. Z3 1.9/ Rx7tt    8"
> 2000 + lbs e.g. Miata       7"
> < 2000 lbs e.g. Lotus élan  6"
> <= 1000 lbs e.g. lotus 7    5"

How about this all numbers are MAX size tires with standard SP wheel
allowances

> 3000 + lbs e.g. Corvette         305+
> 2500 + lbs e.g. Z3 1.9/ Rx7tt    245
> 2000 + lbs e.g. Miata       225
> < 2000 lbs e.g. Lotus élan 205
> <= 1000 lbs e.g. lotus 7    185


The only place this gets thrown off are the Hoosier bias ply's they perform
like a much larger tire, now last thing I heard is we will not have to worry
about them for much longer since they are made in only one size and are
being phased out by Hoosier, however I feel a radial only clause can close
That problem.

How does this strike you, as for including all the SM excluded cars, which
looks perfect?

DG "MR SM" wrote
Interesting idea - and it's not without merit, either.

There are, however, some pitfalls:

1) SM is based on the SP rules, and the SP rules say "any width wheel" Not
only would you have to write a new rule to close the loophole, I'd really
hate to see a SP-transplant get saddled with all his existing wheels now
illegal. Shades of Prepared!

2) You have to do your homework, because in no case should any car's Stock
wheels be illegal as shipped. Probably not a problem in Miata-space, but
I'd bet there's a few Corvettes in the 2700lb range with factory 9" (or
better) wheels.

3) Bring car weight into a classing proposal at your peril. Once you have
weights on the books, that means you need to start weighing cars in
impound. That adds a ton of administrative overhead to a class, and you
want to avoid that if at all possible.

However, I see your problem here. I had always kinda seen BSM as being
"anything not allowed in SM" as the eligibilty requirement. Done deal. But
I guess you have the same small/light vs big/heavy problem that we have,
only worse, as our small/light cars tend to be front drivers, and so that
limits the amount of power they can put down. Most 2-seaters (ex CRX) are
rear-drivers though, so you don't have that little extra bit of balancing
help for the majority of your cars.

Hmmmm.....



This I can help with. You allow:

- 2 seats, normal SM limits or displacement/induction
- 4 seat, "sports car based" (from SM exclusion list) with normal SM limits
on displacement/induction
- 4 seat, SM-legal, any displacement/induction, all other SM rules apply

What I want to do is send you the 383 Camaros and the Vortech 5.0 Mustangs,
so I can get performance data on them to see if they can be brought into SM
without tipping the balance. I rather suspect I can, but I need data first.

I think you're too narrow in the 2500-3000 lb range. Getting a Corvette
sub-3000 isn't all that tough, and stock Corvette tires are 275s, with a
design rim width of 9.5" (and I think they'll fit 12" without much
trouble!) And make no mistake, a BIG chunk of your participation pool is
Corvettes.

Hmmm....

How about:

3000+ 10"+
2750  9.5"
2500  9"
2250  8"
2000  7"
1500  6"
1499- 5"

After all, what you really are after here is to put the light cars on
skinnier wheels, because small+light is a much bigger bonus than lots of
power. Once you hit 2500 or so, large changes in tire width pay much, much
smaller dividends than at lighter weights, and it stops mattering so much.
Don't piss off anyone you don't have to! :)

DG



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