Thanks Bill I was wondering how to answer that.

They have been building AAA/USAC "specialty" championship cars as early as the late fifties. Maybe earlier. Roadsters for pavement and uprights for dirt. I even remember midget and sprint roadsters back in the golden era. So building specialty cars is not new by any means.

I do think changes need to be made. But IMO it would be a big mistake to eliminate pavement races. It's is what floats my boat. Please USAC, don't make me watch late models on pavement. On the other hand, I could always watch supers...:2:

well thats what it takes to do it! So you now see why theres not more races! And a promoter can get the same drivers at a sprint car race for $30000

---------- Post added at 08:48 AM ---------- Previous post was at 08:46 AM ----------

and they raced together dirt and pavement!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

If a requiring HANS device and radios is enough to keep some drivers/teams from competing in USAC, then the requirement of a 'special frame'(to them) is surely enough. There are some folks that still won't buy the HANS just to run USAC. They appear to be happy with racing for less money. That, by definition, means that fewer cars are at any given USAC dirt sprint car show.

I erred by referencing FOXCO earlier. What I SHOULD have said is the "Fox Boys". They, and plenty like them, run many MSCS, KISS, and weekly shows with their current equipment. It seems unlikely to me that very many would buy spec USAC frames, in addition to their current equipment, which would mean a reduced car count at USAC dirt sprint car races. Yes?

What does "fox had a roadster for pavement and a dirt sprint car!!!!!!!!!!! For years!!!!!!!!!!", have to do with anything? Isn't it your suggestion that this is the exactly the thing that should be done away with? The part that I'm not understanding, is how the "one car" philosophy would appease anyone, except the guy that is chosen to build and sell them. I feel that the well funded teams would immediately have dedicated USAC spec cars for dirt, and dedicated USAC spec cars for pavement, i.e. a stable of cars for one series, which is what we have now. Even though, they would all have to be 'the same frame'. In addition, I must say, that the "buy this car, or don't race USAC for more money" argument has a very familiar ring to it, e.g., the 2006 and 2007 USAC Silver Crown series.

People don't always agree on things, right? It's mostly all opintions anyway. I'm sure you'd agree that's it's okay to disagree. See 'ya in Richmond!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cZNlraF0xec

Hey, Vukie. I was talking to Bill Gardner at Vermillion County Speedway a couple of weeks ago. We were talking about some of the posters that we missed, that didn't post any more. You were at the top of the list. That list also included Lauren Besecker and Justin Hatten, to name a few.

Jerry

I saw Vukie at Danville a couple weeks back. It was nice to see him at a race again. Hope you make it down to Indiana soon, Russ!!

how long have you been racing? Do you own a car? The usac car would be the same car that you would run dirt & pavement !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! One car the same car!!!!!!!!!!! What part don't you understand!14:: It would save money to run the same car!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! instead of having two different cars!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!:

so whats your point? You have no more to say then that?

I have been working on sprint cars for 20 years to pre-answer your future questioning of my qualifications to speak on this subject. I know exactly what he is saying. Even if you have a "spec" frame the teams with money are still going to build mutiple frames and "trick" them up a little for dirt by using lighter tubing in key locations to help them flex a little more.
Posted via Mobile Device