Marcus Merideth wrote:
>It is obviously not safe to have an idea and express in on Team.net.
Oh, I wouldn't go that far. I've never heard of anyone suffering an injury or
debilitating disease because of a team.net post. And Dennis seems to survive
whatever mistreatment he receives here. He certainly has no hesitation to
return for more whenever he has an axe to grind.
>and we ended up discussing
>the interesting fact that many of the local ESP crowd have moved to >SM.
Well, if this is a trend (it may be for all I know), then maybe somewhere down
the road ESP will be rendered null and void by SM. I'm open to that possibility.
>was huge in Detroit and now SM is huge with many muscle cars.
Is this a problem?
>I have heard
>all the complaints from people about the SP rules being old and not
>representing the current state of modification in the real world. And
>amazingly enough I tend to agree.
Amazingly enough, I don't tend to agree. SP rules provide hard limits on some
of the most expensive performance modifications. I claim that's a Good Thing. I
don't want to be allowed to alter camshafts, valvetrains, etc. Prepared and Mod
(and now SM) all allow for the possiblity of building hand grenade motors. I
think that's enough.
>I also would not
>mind throwing a cam in my car and playing in BSP. That does not scare me in
Hold on a minute here. First, SM rules don't just allow you to "throw a cam" in
your car. They allow _unlimited_ driveline changes with the single restriction
that the engine has to come from the original manfuacturer. They allow
_unlimited_ suspension changes with the only restriction being that the
original pickup points be retained. Do you really think the BSP guys wouldn't
mind if you show up with a car that fully exploits all of those allowances? I'd
sorta want to hear from them on that one.
>Locally here in Detroit some of the clubs allow cams in SP.
That's not the same as allowing an SM car to run in an SP class.
>It seems to me(my humble opinion not backed with anything more than my eyes)
>that the majority of SP cars are getting older.
I think the majority of _all_ cars are getting older. ;<) If you find one that
gets _newer_, lemme know. I'll be buying one a' those. (strictly joking here
Seriously, if some SP competitors run older cars, how exactly does that
constitute a problem? This is one of the questions that has yet to be
>I have a
>little familiarity with the road race rules and they used something called
>limited preparation rules to increase the competition in some of the
>production classes. So you end up with old cars to one set of rules and
>newer cars to a different set of rules.
A la Prepared (which originally derived from Production), in a way. Each car
has its own minimum weight, maxiumum rim size, valve size, allowed induction,
etc. I would argue that such a system is well-nigh impossible to implement
fairly in autox (I've never seen any evidence that it works very well in road
racing either), that it is open to accusations of political influence (why'd
you guys reduce my venturi sizes from last year?), and that it is potentially
more costly to competitors.
>It would seem
>to me if we took the SM rules and after the real potential of the class
>becomes evident, combined it with another class (what ever class) with two
>sets of rules, we could then have competition and less classes.
Better yet, if we see the real potential of SM, and it pulls most of the
competitors from another class, we eliminate the other class. That's already
provided for in the rules, and I believe it will work.
>Now I know
>somebody is going to just chew me up for having an idea and an >opinion.
Hopefully, you don't see disagreement with your idea as getting "chewed up." I
might point out that your presentation of the idea is somewhat more subdued
(and reasonable) than Dennis'. I still disagree, however.