Quote:
Originally Posted by MTCRX
If stock is stock than why is there a need to change the rules? As cars improve stock cars improve. I would argue that shocks can be a HUGE improvement over stock, much more than a catch can. Who is to say someone would change a stock radiator to a half radiator and save measurable front end weight. If a stock class requires stock parts, it is usually very easy to see what parts of a car have been changed from stock and everyone is on a more even playing field. Why does everyone want to "mod" a car but not move in class. That is the way the rules are laid out. And I still think that a new person to the sport will feel more welcomed if they see the stock cars really are close to stock. I don't buy the reliability issue, what stock car is going to overheat in autocross with a well functioning cooling system? If it does then that is a poor choice of car for autocross in stock form. If you change from stock you go to a prepared or better class because that is meant to handle even the smallest changes, so there is no question that the cars in stock are as basic and original as they can be.
|
You cannot legislate spending in any form of competition, those with the will & the way will find advantages any way they can. Now, don't get me wrong...I'm not saying the stock category is great as-is & needs no revisions, I agree in the present form items such as tires has gone beyond the reach of the avg casual competitor. However, 100% stock isn't a realistic option & will never happen.
Shocks for example are almost impossible to legislate...look up the cost for a brand new strut for ANY car through your local dealer & compare that cost to a new Koni. Not only is the Koni MUCH cheaper than OEM, it's a performance benefit. Sure, the chances of needing a new shock on any car built in the past few years is slim, but I don't think anyone would argue that a new shock is going to work better than one with 50K+ miles on it...so what happens when the fast guys with unlimited budgets are putting new OEM shocks in their car every year? What if in some cars the difference between new shocks & 20K mile shocks is a half second?
What I do think can be done is to revise the shock rule to at least minimize the theoretical advantage between the fastest shocks & OEM. IMO, the difference between an off-the-shelf Koni/Bilstien/Tokico & the best Moton/Penske/AST/Ohlins/Pimpy-aluminum-bodied-double-adjustable-custom-valved-remote-reservoir-$8K set of shocks is very little...guys like Sam have proven time and again simple set-ups can win. So my idea is to eliminate remote reservoirs & limit adjustments to only one...unless the car came OEM with those options, in which they would need to run OEM shocks in order to keep those functions. Sure, some will spend the money to custom valve their Konis, or even carry multiple sets for different conditions...but the performance delta between best & worst would be much less than it is now.
Anyway, point is, gong to 100% OEM shocks could actually make stock more expensive, yet definitely less fun. The rest of the stock-legal mods are actually quite in-expensive, don't make the car un-drivable, & can easily be sold off for most of your investment. Tires on the other hand, that is a completely different story....