RX-8 to CSP...thoughts?
 

I know there had been a lot of discussion about whether the RX8 would be a fit in DSP; there is a proposal floating around to move it to CSP, along with a few other cars, including the S2000.

My thought is that the RX-8 would probably be a good match with the NC miata (which is a good match with the NA/NB miatas), but given that the S2000 is already faster than the RX-8 in BSP, including the S2000 in the move would kill the current CSP cars.

i'd think about building a CSP RX-8, but not if the S2k is there.

After the E36 BMW from Arizona kicks the living snot out of the rest of the DSP class this year then it's likely for the RX-8 to get slotted there finally.

CSP is an RX-8 ass whooping adventure. No chance against the smaller, lighter, and more nimble Miatas let alone the same thing with more power potential i.e. the S2000

frankly, the idea that somebody would even consider slotting a popular 4 seat sedan in CSP in the first place getting out as a proposal brings the credibility of the entire process into question. Is anyone on the board actually paying attention or are they allowing the ACs to make the final decisions now and rubber stamping any kooky idea that flys by? Sheesh ....


.

Mike,

CSP has beaten BSP at Nats for 5+ years. The RX-8 stands a better chance in BSP than CSP, but it belongs in neither of these classes. ;) A 106" wheelbase just can dance through cones like a top CSP car, and a 220whp 13B-MSP can't keep up with a 400whp Evo IX.

The good news is that the SPAC is really trying to fix a structure that is pretty broken...the bad news is that they aren't addressing the root of the majority of the classing problems, awd/boost cars...think about it, before you tell me I'm crazy :ylsuper:

Here's the deal: create AWDSP, and put all the awd cars in there...yeah, I know, the very small number of WRX's, R32's and other like will get thrown under the bus...

ASP is fine already, BSP becomes an interesting class again (without having to move cars), CSP is strong already, ESP maintains stability, take away the stupid EG motor allowance given this year to fix FSP, let DSP shake out, this year, before any moves are contemplated...it all becomes easier once the square peg in round hole that is mixing awd with 2wd in BSP goes away.

Where does this "it's broken" BS come from? WTF is broken?

People need to quit whining about their desire for an I Class and just compete to the best of their ability.

Srsly ....

It's only going to get worse as the generation that currently is not keeping score at soccer games grows up. :rolleyes:

SP is not thriving, numbers are going down in most classes, lots of good cars that used to play aren't showing up anymore, there's no room being made for potential new cars...is broken too strong of a word? maybe...but, healthy it ain't.

Besides, for it to be an "I Class" whine would indicate that I have a dog in the fight...which I don't...I'm an objective observor.

You going to argue that the Evo/STi in BSP isn't the source of pretty much all the proposed juggling?

Hmmm and ST is thriving, wonder where the entries are coming from?

I dunno...get back to me with some data :smoker:

Seriously, if you look at ST classes, it appears there's a cross section of former stock, street prepared and newbies, imho. Whatever, the idea of limited prep/street tires is working for many...although, if you look at the big STR class at San Diego, many of those entries came from other ST classes (Motonishi, Hayter etc)

did not realize that. in that case, moving what i suppose are BSP also-rans to CSP certainly doesn't seem to make sense.

I went back five years and got bored. I wouldn't be surprised if it was longer than that. This move definitely makes no sense and it's hard to understand the reasoning behind it. Sipe said it best...

Here's a solution. Move all Miatas to ASP.

:angel:

Congrats on breaking the new C Stock class in record time ..... :cwm27:

ST is not broken because of SP. That has to be the ultimate BS-call ever. It's a new classification that will take time to develop, just as SP took years even decades to become what it is today.

Yes, you don't run in the category or have a dog in the fight, which probably explains why you and the other people in that camp are out fantasy bench racing in left field again.

ST was partially developed to recoup the mistakes made in SP. It's ironic that people want to pigeonhole the category back into the SP classing and rules mold again. The AWD complaint only flies in STU now. If you feel that STU needs to be split up to allow larger 2WD cars a place to play then make that argument, because otherwise stating that all of ST is broken just because of that situation looks like ignorance run amuck.

I'm not sure if any of the above is addressed to me...

All I'm saying is that SP has problems, the proposal out for comment right now is all about trying to fix the mess that BSP has caused and the best way to do it is to move the AWD cars into their own class. No racing organization has ever succesfully integrated AWD into existing classing (long term) and there's some basic, physical reasons why that is true.

I do NOT think "ST is broken" and never said so. ST is still a work in progress...a very successful work in progress...but, that's not where I was going with my thoughts. I was just pointing out that the whole flustercluck proposal being floated right now is primarily driven by issues in BSP and there's an obvious solution :)

ST came from the two biggest screwups/mistakes the SEB made. R-comps in Stock and SP not being a street car class but a trailer queen class.

Maybe if sp had been created a few years later it might of turned out better. The no emissions and open intake rules came from the insistance of the California contingent whining about being "unfairly" down on power having to meet california emission regs. A few years later with everybody using fuel injections it wouldn't of been as much of a reason.