I don't know from what rock dug this red herring; as far as I know that option is not on the table (nor should it be). What I'm rejecting is the "logical" course of action that ended up with the 1.8L Miata being formulated using the lower of the two available weights (despite evidence of other cars being treated wholly differently.)Originally Posted by tnord
The base problem here is that you are trying to have your cake and eat it too: on the one hand you state we should base weights on stock factory listed power (but only when applied to the earlier 1.8L Miata), yet on the other hand you support adjusting weights based on "what we know" (e.g., CRX and later 1.8L Miata). In the specific case of the Miata, you want the car weighted based on its earlier (lower) rated horsepower. What you're TRYING to (unsuccessfully) convince us is that the actual "known" output of both engines is the same as the 25% adder to the 125(?) hp engine, that the later engine only gets ~18% increase in IT trim. That, my friend, is "known info adjustments", not basing decisions on manufacturer's data and standard formulas.
Absent all that "knowledge", you know that any other car would be - and has been - classified using the higher of the two horsepower figures. Any confusion as to why people see this as favorable treatment...?
If you want to propose breaking out the two cars on separate lines, be my guest! My prediction - a silly-easy one to make - is that the later one will be initially ignored, but in the end the earlier one will eventually get adjusted based on "what we know", just like what happened to the Honda CRX, and they'll both be put back on the same line, this time with the weight calculated using the standard formula on the later car's horsepower figures.
Go ahead: prove me wrong.
GA
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks