Re: 88, 89 imsa cars

[Eliot Lim <eliot@u.washington.edu>]

On Sun, 17 Dec 1995 STEADIRIC@aol.com wrote:

> >for example, it had double wishbone suspension and carbon fiber brakes
> >while the trans am car had steel brakes and struts.
> 
> Itcy Trigger finger hit's the BUZZER....   BBBBZZZZZZTTTTTTTT......  GTO 
> cars did not have carbon fiber brakes, nope was'nt allowed, did'nt 
> happen, that statement is wrong.

sorry, i meant carbon fiber driveshafts... (yes, there's a photo in the
book of it).. tee hee hee hee hee..  BBBBBZZZZZZZZZZZZTT
 
> Trust me it was GONE.  I've been all over that car, my Mechnics have 
> worked on the Group 44 team, 

alright, i'll take your word for it on this one...
 
>My team raced against the Audi's.  BTDT.

were you one of the backmarkers?  :) :) :)  i still have some video
of those trans am races, tell me what to look for...

> >- further evidence comes from the fact that they had to use struts
> >up front.  if the front was replaced with tube frame there would
> >have been no reason to use struts.

> No but Audi made a choice to use the struts so they could LEGALY 
> advertise that it's "Just like the car that you drive on the street"

nah, nonsense.  BBZZZZZZZTTTT. since when did the marketing line
determine how the racecar is built?  it's only after they starting
kicking butt that the marketing started.  


eliot