Quote Originally Posted by tnord View Post
displacement. valvetrain architecture. valve size/count. TB size. etc.

i'm not really saying that's the way to do it in a class with more significant mechanical restrictions like cams and TB......but it's not a completely random number.
We tried that years ago, and it just wasn't repeatable. (I think that the closest we got was total exhaust valve area, by the way.) Trust me - "physical attributes" was my mantra because they can't be fudged, but we kept running into wingers, to the degree that we had more exceptions than rules.

BUT that's honestly not the real issue.

Regardless of what establishes the baseline, there's still got to be some system in place to allow for subjectivity. (Jeebus - am I actually saying this?) If that process is one CRB member pulling a number out of the air based on what he thinks Model X is going to do on the track compared to Models A, B, and C, then THAT is wrong. Unless of course, the record is going to reflect that he made that decision.

If a "physical attributes" model gets developed and published, then maybe. But I have a fear that what will happen is someone will pick and choose how they consider these attributes, in order to make them line up behind a preconceived notion of what a given car should weigh.

Prove me wrong...?

K