Posted By mrazny on 06 Dec 2013 11:08 AM
Knowing little about the DSM options, does moving them both on the same line help anything UD/BD? In general I'd think it should either be specifically targeted everyone can benefit moves (the WRX), or complete (all AWD cars). I'm not sure why the DSM is targeted, and thus I'm not writing any letters unless I feel better about all parts.
I did mentioned earlier that this discussion about DSMs in ESP took a great amount of time and threads in the past, and it was accepted back than that it makes no sense to move those out of the class. Things that were discussed in detailes were power and torque graphs combined with the gearing that goes for each car and thing were never showing up in favor for DSMs. One reason for this is that 2G DSMs came with puny turbocharger named T25. With all bells and whistles this turbo is maxed out at about 275 HP and a bit under 300 for torque. And those are flywheel numbers!
The only advantage was the amount of weight these things could go down to and Charles's car is in 2900s and things are pretty much done with that car. They were also narrower from most of the other cars in the class, but with going to 285 (which is also the max width this one can take due to some issues in the front), width is pretty much on the same page as those other cars in the class.
So, from any angle you go at it, this is pretty much it. Charles is running triple 8760 Penskes all around and they work pretty well after all these years. Camber is maxed out for the front and geometry is as good as it gets (or pretty darn close to it).
Update/backdate options are not there for the DSMs since rules were purposefully changed back in 1999 or so to eliminate using a turbo from the 1G cars that was helpful and increased power levels to low to mid 300s. Even with that thing allowed now, this would still be far from matching turbos that EVOs from all generations are using and getting amount of air flow those are capable off. Basically, with all bells and whistles from any potential and improbably backdates, DSMs would still be behind the EVOs - plain and simple!
The same goes for any other move that could be taken into consideration. If we would use BSP where M3s are which used to be in ESP - that match up is futile. CSP is different type altogether, so I will not even try it. DSP is dominated by the Bimmers and times those car are doing are always way faster then anything in ESP. FSP would be nice place and I would come out from retirement with great chances of getting a jacket!
Times that were done so far from DSMs in ESP are pretty much in line with everything else that is in there right now. There are two generations of WRXs in there and newer one has bigger engine (2.5 vs. 2.0 litters) and that is a plus for sure! When it showed up while back I was saying this would be a good car to have. And according to latest Nationals results, it is definitely a good car to have. But, on the day one fastest time was pulled by the 3rd gen Camaro/Pontiac car. Second day was better for WRX and they won. By a whopping 0.6 seconds and that is just that - a single data point that went on the side of WRX-es. It could have been that Mark had a bad day - he is still human at the end - and that is why this happened. It could be the other way around too and WRX guy had a bad day and he could have smoked everyone by over a second on both days. But, nothing is there to convince anyone to make any conclusion for that single data point.
If there is truth in what you said about needing 50 or so letters from members to add proposal to the rules, those guys would have to do the same against the 3rd gens as well. Everything is pointing out that those cars are on the same page as the results WRX showed. So for those 50 or so drivers things would be the same - trophy feeders! They typically have inferior car preps, run with all of the extra weights, rarely have anything better than Koni yellows, and they are not that good of the drivers to challenge those like Mark (you can use Dadio here if you wish as well!). But, I don't think this is something that happened and made SPAC adding this as proposal.
What else could make them to do this? I do believe that SPAC might be trying to make some changes here and this looks like they are bringing back from the death idea about the AWD Street Prepared class again! This effort was running around for a while several times and it was always rendered as wrong. Of course, it could be something else altogether, but I am not able to read their minds at this time!
If they are attempting AWD class, than wording is really insulting and makes no sense! It could be just a first step to pile more of these cars to the ASP (well it looks kind of like AwdSP). Again, there are lots of "could" words in here, but there is nothing else that makes any more sense other than that. So, either way they go, there are too many AWD cars out there that they can all be stuffed into the same class. On one end you have those like GTR, Porsche 911, R8, or other of those more or less super cars. Than, you have cars like EVOs and STIs which are in class of its own in a way. Than you have WRX and DSMs as well. Now where in all of that we should have AWD Bettles, Golfs, Audis, Fords, other (mostly non-turboed Subarus, and others? What we do with older versions of these cars? They have completely different potential levels and there is no way someone can decide with clear mind to put them in the same class! Have two or three of those classes makes even less sense.
At the end, DSMs were part of the ESP for more then 2 decades and shown to be good competition to the rest of the class over and over again. If SPAC wants to kill those cars and stuff them in ASP for whatever reason they could come up with, so be it. If it happens to be that way, I think it would be shame and no way how members should be treated in SCCA. If majority agrees that is OK to do so, that is what will happen nevertheless! It still would not make it more appropriate or right!