View Single Post
Old 12-15-2015, 11:29 AM   #3893
TrqlessWonder
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Drives: 2014 FR-S
Location: Upstate NY
Posts: 287
Thanks: 127
Thanked 148 Times in 93 Posts
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by SeanRTR View Post
If the exception said 'joint-venture cars that share the same chassis/driveline (Engine/Trans)' can you think of an example of how this screws anything up?
I can't think of any advantages that are unlocked with this wording, but maybe I'm missing something.
Saabaru/WRX wagon - I see no advantage/these cars all blew up and went to SM/ST
Solstice/Sky - ZOK suspension BS Saturn Sky? Who cares, do it.
Firebird/Camaro - WS6 parts on an SS Camaro, Z28 parts on a Formula (not a V6 model) Who cares again, I see no real advantages here either.
Corvette/Caddy and F150/Mustang - ....these are not the same cars.


Yep, who cares, do it. I can't think of a situation where this rule would allow a car any kind of significant performance advantage. Someone tell me what I'm missing.
It's 'spensive to frankenstein a best of all world's car. And, IMO, not in the spirit of the category.


Quote:
The FR-S and the BRZ need to be on an equal playing field, period. There's too many SCCA members that bought these cars to compete in Street class to let a Toyota document with unfortunate verbiage alienate half of the owners. I think it's a bit ridiculous to see how many BRZ owners have simply bailed because of this minor performance advantage, but the cars should be on the same level of prep.
That's just it. They are. It's the same level playing field that the 350Z, RX-8, NC, ND, and everyone else enjoys. It's called CS.
__________________
-Mike
#24 CS/CSR
TrqlessWonder is offline   Reply With Quote