Results 1 to 20 of 78

Thread: IT should really think about welcoming Older SM's....... Without a new class..

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    BEAVER,PA
    Posts
    273

    Default

    Dano77
    this weekend I am Running SM and parking my IT car..........your right,it is simple. Haha
    Just thought timing was good....

    Greg

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    7,381

    Default

    Where are the conflicts in the regs? Where are the cars not compliant to IT regs now? Put together a detailed proposal to submit to the CRB; if you want to hash it out before submission, post it here.

    GA

    Edit: I have submitted several times a proposal to allow de-powering of the racks. I've been rejected each time. The general concern centers around two points: that's not the way it has always been done and it would upset the "balance of power". I counter that the first point is irrelevant except in the context of stability, and we have "what we know" for the the second point.

    As for the Torsen rear ends of the 1.6s, given lack of availability I would not oppose a line-item allowance to change the pumpkins to '99 to allow the Torsen. But it ain't gonna happen on its own; you need to request it and convince the ITAC to support it to the CRB.
    Last edited by Greg Amy; 06-10-2014 at 04:32 PM.

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •