Very interesting discussion here. I have a little experience in this area, and I'd like to toss in my .02...

Those who claim that there is no room for an additional program in thier area are probably right. Those who claim that an additional program featuring lower cost of entry and greatly increased duty cycles would be a good thing, are probably also right. How do you get past this?

Design a product that fits in. You have a clean sheet of paper, after all. The technology available to us these days is so far out ahead of what we had when the small block chevy was concieved, that it will not be difficult to produce a product that could run with the 360 (not talkin' 410's). It would be a completely different spec, with completely different rules. Then the choice would be up to the competitors. They could continue to run an ASCS legal 360, perform their own service and not have to send thier engine anywhere. The downside to this would be the same as it already is - the engine would be on the expensive side, and duty cycles would be shorter.

The alternative would be the new-tech design. The advantage here would be lower cost of entry (good for building car count), longer duty cycles, and most likely less complexity and required service. The down side of course, is that when you DO have a problem, you have to send it in. Sending the unit to a supplier that is responsible for maintaining the specification is the ONLY way we know of to insure that the spec does not, little by little, get out of hand as we so often see happen. If you place that responsibility in the hands of a single entity, then it becomes that entities best interest to insure that the spec is maintained. When you let more than one entity perform service, the natural business forces of competition take over and the result is that you lose control of the spec. This is not to say that the "one entity" could not have more than one location, just that at the end of the day, the buck has to stop in one place...

Can it really work? Of course it can work. As Sprint and Midget fans, most of us don't look beyond our own form of racing but if you look out into the broader racing community this has been happening for quite a while. Boats, motorcycles, road racing.. you name it - almost every form of racing out there has already made the transition to modern technology. About the only classes left that I can think of that have not, are Sprint cars and tractors. Who will be last to drag their rulebook, kicking and screaming, into the 21st century?

So, the real question here is this - which is more important, preservation of our traditions, or growth in the future (some would argue SURVIVAL in the future...)?
My feeling is that as a sport we ultimately have no choice. We must preserve as much of our tradition as we can, while keeping our eyes open and embrcing the new technologies that can lower costs, and improve performance and reliability.

Sprint car engines featuring full engine management systems are coming to the sport. They WILL lower costs. They WILL increase participation by both competitors and by sponsors (because they will feature more relavant equipment). The organizations that will be most successful will be the ones with the testicular fortitude to stand up to those living in the past, without handing the farm to those living for the future. It's all about the TRANSITION - finding a way to include the new stuff without excluding the old stuff. It IS doable - if we can put a man on the moon we can figure out a way to run efi and mechanical 360's together.

Keith