Pat, with all due respect. There is a great difference between the weight/foot pound of torque between the 1.6 and the 99 plus and that is not bitchin, that's hard truthful fact. That is hard factual numbers clearly indicating that your son or you can make a mistake (we all make mistakes) or will come out of a corner at under 5,000 rpm in your 99 against a 1.6 car and we know who wins that deal. There is a difference between hard truthful fact and whatever your calling bitching. You guys have a 1.6 and you have a 99, compare the torque/horsepower dyno graphs, there ain't no bitching within the graphs. Were talking about two things here, torque and bitching, nothing else. As the rules are today cost can not equalize the weight/foot pound of torque. 
Dad can argue with the best of them so I will let him respond if he wishes.
This is not a parity thread, but some how you went there on your own.
I started the thread as an offshoot on the Hoosier tire thread. I have read dozens if not hundreds of posts about the "good old days" where you could run at the front with a junk yard engine 1.6, a set of tires would last 3 weekends and the fields were so big you were lucky if you got a spot in the false grid. A class that is essentially SSM or exactly like SSM with a Spec Tire that has 200+ tread wear rating should be the ticket for all of those thousands of displaced racers.
I dumbed down the suspension in my SSSSSM class because I didn't want all those really tricky people taking advantage of the low budget grassroots racers by being able to afford a set of scales and set up pads.
I tightened the dyno spec, to easily achievable numbers for minimal dollars (refreshed head $1,200). I also added the DQ factor so nobody would be too tempted to squeeze every last 1/4 horsepower out of the car (as we all know that gets expensive).
Took off the hardtop, because who wants to spend $1000 for a top and $1,200 for a donor car. Also it would make the fast guy easy pray for P2, and P3 if they just work together a little and draft by him. Again equalizing the field.
I created a Spec Tire that if raced un-shaved might last an entire season for about $500.
I wouldn't allow a National Champion so only grassroots racers would care about the class. We wouldn't want any truly talented people with big wallets ruining the class (This means you Caddell, Foss, Rampleberg, Drago, Von Chaboneau, Lamb, Goulart,.........) Oh snap, I think so of those guys were just talented and didn't have big wallets.
So for about $5,000 to $6,000 you have a Spec Class that should not tear up equipment because you aren't ringing every last bit speed out of 20+ year old car.
I have given an option that lowers costs and creates great parity between the haves and have nots in financial department.
And the response from those that complain the most about costs is::
(crickets chirping)
(crickets chirping)
(crickets chirping)
As i have always suspected, there is a small vocal segment on this forum that like to complain.
That is all they want to do.
If I handed them $5,000 no strings attached they would complain it wasn't $5001.
Most people race SM because of the competition not the costs, if it was about costs they would race an IT
class.
Don't get me wrong, I would like to spend less. I am all for finding the magic bullet to parity and rising costs in the class, but the class is a victim of its own success, and that is not necessarily a bad thing.
Sign In
Create Account
Back to top
Report
