Quote Originally Posted by Knestis View Post
And therein lies the rub.

This is going to chaff a few backsides but even I think the we need a "nuclear" option if a real preponderance of evidence emerges over time that an engine package/type/whatever appears to deserve one of those "special" multipliers. These cases should be very few and very far between.

That's the CRX Rule - the basis for the "review the resulting weight" step. The potential for problems is in the fact that there aren't any real checks and balances on its use.

K

EDIT - and FINALLY, finally - you all better understand that when you ask for change, you get what you get. If one/any/all of the membership don't like the resulting weight on something after it's been through the process, as implemented by the people charged with doing it, no bitching. And if you think you own car's in its sweet spot but your competitor asks us to review it and you get weight? Tough titties, right? When I do evaluation work, I never cease to be amazed at how the degree to which someone agrees with our data correlates to the degree to which they profit by the findings. How the "fairness" of a call by the refs depends on whether it's on your team or the other guys...
Quoted for truth.

This is my concern. We ALL know that the CRX and it's extended family would be horrible overdogs if classed straight off the Process. How many other unknown cars are out there that may be turned into the new "CRX" via wholesale rewighting? What then? Reweight again but this time based on performance? Ugh. How does you catch these types of cars on the first run thru the process? If you make the adjustment at a later date, how do you keep from having this turn into performance based adjustments?