Quote:
Originally posted by GregAmy:
Darin, knowing that we consistnetly face rules interpretations that may fly in the face of the original intent, and knowing that ideals and attitudes change with administrations, I think it would be a FINE idea to specifically put this intent in the rules NOW. Otherwise, 10 years from now we may see a devolution into true comp adjustments, with the basis of "well, we don't KNOW their intent, so we just have to go by the stated rule and adjust for parity (or allow spherical bearings, or allow intake porting, or allow MoTec ECUs, yada, yada, yada...)
GA
Well, I for one can believe that we're much less likely to see that now, since we actually have a club that is working to make long-range plans. Instead of working on anecdotal problems, SCCA is actually trying to formulate changes that will set trends rather than react to circumstances. I'll be the first to admit that the process still needs improvement, but I would hope that the guys here in the AC's and CRB can attest to finally working along a true philosphy (not that mythical class-philosophy thing they always cite when shooting down the battery relocation thing though...)