Quote Originally Posted by Greg Amy View Post
Allow me to clarify my esteemed STAC member/peer's comments...

There is currently no discussions about active adjustments in STL. While of course we reserve the right to consider making minimal vehicle-specific allowances in the future to attempt to equalize engine performance (e.g., intake manifolds, alternate throttle bodies, etc) that is NOT being discussed - or even being considered - at this time. STL is a Regional-only class, and although we - I - want it to be National it is not a focus for adjustments.

My personal vision for the class is to go with the "here's the chart, pick your car", but I am *very* open to the idea of limited allowances for specific cars to try and get the horsepower numbers up to the "goal" or bogey level. Given I'm personally planning on running STL, I don't want to participate in a one-marque, one-car class.

Though - and this is most assuredly my own opinion - since the vast majority of cars 2L and below are FWD, it will likely result in STL being a FWD-centric (though not -exclusive) class.



GA
Since the classing system is based on lbs per liter, it seems as though a more liberal allowance of alternate parts is in order, as the number of engines with the right combination of head, intake, throttle body, etc is rare. As you point out, competing in a one marque class isn't as fun as in a multi marque class....at least one where the rules aren't spec. As it stands, the rules that limit part changes are also limiting variety.

Further, a more liberal allowances of intakes and the like would tend to propagate swaps and FWD engines in RWD cars, which, if I understand, is one of the cornerstones of the class.

As it stands, the rules that limit part changes are also limiting variety.