Will Kalman wrote:Hmmm, I went back and read the Fastrack and don't see a reference for "lite" but I do see a new class with the temporary name "ST new" and I thought that is what you were talking about. There's room for another FWD econbox class because new FWD econoboxes are vastly different in performance than older ones with little chance of that being bridged (and making a redundant class). Since it is the new cars that are being left out in the cold and that's where new membership comes in, where the car prep isn't 80% restoration work, and 7+ year-old depreciated cars are available that don't upset the performance balance (or status quo) of the class, it makes sense to make a new class. If it were new cars that were dominant over old ones, we could say assume there wasn't a big demand for members who wanted to restore a 20-year-old car that wasn't competitive. We find ourselves in this spot because within the realm of econobox autocross performance, there is an inversion in the "newer is better" trend that we see in almost every other facet of automotive engineering.
Will, I get all that, but if the short term choice, given only one new class, is between the proposed ST-new (which I'm calling "ST lite") and another sport car class, I think the answer is obvious.
STR was a home run. Mostly because it leveraged off of a universe of fun to drive sports cars that really come alive with the ST rule set mods. Why not take that concept to the next level?
Instead, we get a move further down the performance scale. Do you really think that owners of Yaris', Mazda 2, Fiesta etc are going to invest thousands into those cars to autocross? I might be wrong, but I don't see the pent up demand, I don't see any "bang for the buck" (in terms of performance potential vs. capital cost) and I don't see the class being needed...yet. Maybe it siphons off some HS Minis, but I can't see it making numbers.
btw, I supported keeping the Civic out of STS, but I see that as an unrelated topic.