He actually requested "non-USDM". I think we tend to revert to using a generic "JDM" (yo!) for everything not-US, like "Kleenex".
Nothing will happen on this issue without significant membership input.
GA
Should NON-US motors be allowed in ST?
- Thread starter Chip42
- Start date
GA
Rabbit07
New member
Here was my request.
"
Letter #3798
Title: Include Non USDM Engines
Request: Please include non US Market engines. I suggest that these engine packages be approved on a case by case basis. Require a VTS to be generated and that those packages can only run by that "STU" VTS. Competitors will be required to sumit documentation to support requested classifications."
I did this to officalize it and get it into the system. Keep in mind that this was my suggestion, not writen into law. My thinking is that all non US Market engine packages would need to have a VTS, just like an ex WC touring car.
"
Letter #3798
Title: Include Non USDM Engines
Request: Please include non US Market engines. I suggest that these engine packages be approved on a case by case basis. Require a VTS to be generated and that those packages can only run by that "STU" VTS. Competitors will be required to sumit documentation to support requested classifications."
I did this to officalize it and get it into the system. Keep in mind that this was my suggestion, not writen into law. My thinking is that all non US Market engine packages would need to have a VTS, just like an ex WC touring car.
lateapex911
Super Moderator
So it's for STU only?
That seems to fail to help fix the most glaring issue of the ST category, the apparent lack of diverse options for competitive STL cars, and allowing SOME diversity for STL could have helped in that regard.
That seems to fail to help fix the most glaring issue of the ST category, the apparent lack of diverse options for competitive STL cars, and allowing SOME diversity for STL could have helped in that regard.
Hater!
STL is Regional-Only right now. Let's get our National house in order and see how that works out first, then we can let things flow downhill. I'd prefer to see exactly what it is that's going to flow downhill first...
alright - I expect the STAC to get 34 letters about the USDM thing from the March Fastrack as that's how many votes we have on the issue here, and I know you are the motivated set.
I'd LIKE you all to vote FOR allowing non-USDM motors, but all I'm asking is that you submit your letter with your opinion and your reasons.
I'd LIKE you all to vote FOR allowing non-USDM motors, but all I'm asking is that you submit your letter with your opinion and your reasons.
We've received three.
There's no rush; after all, this is a rule change and would not go into affect until 2012. But if you have an opinion, best to make it known... - GA
Its on my todo list
I feel pretty strongly about this and I need some practice writing letters to the CRB/ITAC/STAC/ETC so I will be ready to write in regarding the V8 Camaro and Firebird in ITR...
Seeing as I'm on record with the request, would a letter in support of myself cary any weight?
No need, I'll ensure your old letter is added into the pile. - GA
Done.Greg, if you're just looking for filler, pull up #2428 from last August and throw it on the pile too.
Nope. We have to give it a few months waiting for membership input before we can make a recommendation to the CRB...stay tuned. - GA
Of course. Members may not realize it, that while this isn't a pure democracy vote, many issues are resolved either way based on only a handful of letters. For example, I think we only have about 6-7 letters on this issue...
Our next concall is Monday, I don't know if this issue is on the agenda.
Our next concall is Monday, I don't know if this issue is on the agenda.
Matt93SE
New member
That's nuts. for all the talk I see everywhere about it, you'd think more than 5 people would have taken the time to write in.
I'll hit up the other STU guys and make sure they write in.
lateapex911
Super Moderator
I wrote in! But I don't have an ST car. Not sure if my opinion counts, LOL