I have no dog in this fight since the only midget in the garage is a '48 Kurtis/Offy!!

However, I would like to draw attention to the 2009 results of the National Midget Driver of the Year Engine points system. It was scored as follows:

Engine and Chassis Manufacturer Point System
All races scored - Double Points Awarded Big 8 Midget Events
Feature Finish: 1. 5 pts; 2. 3 pts; 3. 1 pt.
Events with less than 15 cars will not award mfg. points

POINTS
1 Ford-Esslinger 565
2 Mopar 170
3 Fontana 133
4 Toyota 119
5 Chevrolet 83


It would seem to me that when one engine dominates by 3.3 times over the nearest competitor a change might be in order to allow the teams that do not have the resources to purchase an Esslinger to continue to compete.

I believe someone also stated that the Esslinger only became dominant after "15 years and a lot of blood sweat and tears" but if I remember correctly Esslinger lobbied for and was granted an increase in cubic inches. Perhaps the increase was a little too much given their current dominance of the sport.

I applaud USAC for trying something. Limiting the revs impacts the Esslingers more than the other engines currently in use and provides a quick, low cost fix to the problem. If you really want to cut down on ongoing engine costs a compression rule would be the way to go and Jim Morrison’s idea for an engine claim would provide a long term solution.

And now back to your regularly scheduled argument.

Rob Hoffman