Originally Posted by
Bob-Stormer
With the statement that we need more racers, yes, that is good. With the idea that a car that's $50 cheaper is gonna get it done... nope.
I've used this analogy before, I'll use it again. Last motocross race I raced in, 400 riders at the event. Nobody bitching about expense, nobody griping about the new bikes every year. Pits full of $4,000-$12,000 bikes (LOCALLY). Wonder if they'd get more racers if somebody produced a bike for $2000?
Why it is that people associate more racers, ONLY with a low priced car? If that were the case, only the cheapest cars would ever sell. Only the cheapest of ANY hobby product or full size car would ever sell.
With that analogy, the Baja 5T would never sell.
I agree, But how much of a difference in lap times is there between a TC5 and a Hot bodies or T2008? Its also a whole different market bob. Personally I am almost done with an engine that I built for my personal race car that is about 6k in hard parts. But your talking about a 600% difference in cost (2k vs 12k bikes). As you know getting 5% better performance out of something gets REALLY spendy.
And I didn't mean cheap car more racers, I ment a $350 TC5 is more attractive to a new guy than a $500 T2009. as good as the car may be, they also may not be able to get the last 10% out of the car and make the $150 difference worth it is what I was getting at.
Anyhow, if all the MFG hired the best engineers, did more R&D, made the cars that much faster, cost went up 20-40%. Would that make the racing better? Would that improve sales? I don't claim to know all of that.. but it is food for thought. For me at least, since I am going back to school to finish my degree I don't think that a 20% increase for a faster better engineered car will help me want to race, or in this economy afford to race.
Note: bench racing with bob is fun cause it doesn't just talk shit, brings up good points... lol
