|
I just can't see the point in limiting engines to 2.4l (200hp stock) and then spending $ to try to get more HP when a v6 already has more HP (stock) for less than $2k. Ideally I think we need to narrow up the rear tires, but to save people buying wheels and new tires the idea of minimum tire pressures to harden the side walls and try to "crown" the tire a little too lessen grip could be the easiest cheapest way to get the same result (less tire traction) the cheapest horsepower is cubic inches and if you suddenly have more torque than you can hook up, the incentive to spend $ to get more is eliminated. The blue collar worker needs to see this division as affordable and within their grasp. Eliminating engine tech also eliminates all the associated ******** that goes with it. The aluminum v6 engines with forged components might have once been cost prohibitive, but these are now found in stock engines from various manufacturers everywhere. Bottom line.. If you can cost effectively get more HP/torque than you can hook up.. Then yes.. The engines will even last longer and the best setup and driver will see again rise to the top and cubic dollars will not solely determine the outcome. At no time would I suggest creating another class but rather including any engine under 3.8l. (including cycle engines) and let the teams choose their poison
|