I would guess, it was around 210

In 2006 I drove 6 different cars, and at just over 220 lbs none could make weight, so I always think of a personal car (versus rental) with reasonable effort accommodating a 210 lb driver. Thus I like the 230 lbs better, it is unique in allowing us to have equality at a higher weight (This is not selfish I am now 173 lbs and a big believer in fitness...but we want to be open to a wide range of drivers)!

I've lost 20 pounds since the Run Offs (WeightWatchers works!) and I was already lugging around 30 pounds of ballast. My hope would be to reduce the car weight equivalent to the weight reduction with the new stuff. So, I agree with Bruce.

Michael Hausknecht (NE#60)

I voted before reading about the weight reduction expected with the new engine. I want to change my vote from keeping 1670 to owering the weight an amount equal to the savings created by the new parts - PLUS - 20 pounds to accommodate the bigger guys. 20 more pounds can help grow the class by making the class more inclusive. The weight savings plus more horsepower will give us enough increase in performance to keep us ahead of SM speed-wise.

Hey Mike, will the new engine sound better than the current flatulant moan that we have now? At least the old Renaults sounded small bore sports car like.

You can change your vote Jim.

Jim watch the Video link ...you tell me

"we had this discussion a year or so ago- it was felt no adjustment in weight in the car should be made, would be foolish to have to add 50# of plates to the majority of the cars."

Bruce -your comment is a misstatement or in the least taken out of context - about 75% of the drivers wanted no change and about 25% did want a fairer weight. Logically that means 25% can't make minimum weight. The comp board decided majority rules (51%) rather than what would be fair.

Most of the responses from those not wanting to change the weight was that the extra weight was dangerous as the car wasn't designed for it - well the car was designed for a 90 HP engine and now we are looking at 120 HP. That should scare the $#@% out of those truly concerned about the safety of adding weight - or they are hypocrites! Taking away 110# and adding 50# would no longer be a "safety issue" - would still be 60# under existing weight rule.

The new engine will give Enterprises the opportunity to make a fair decision as to weight and do the right thing in my opinion. Adding weight will grow the class. So that is a positive economic factor.

Yes, adding weight will force many to add ballast at a one time expense. But for 20 years 25% of the class have spent lots of money yearly trying to keep weight down - stripping paint, grinding down body sections, titanium bolts, light weight side pods, light seats, not using safety pans under fuel cells, painstaking measurements on fuel, etc plus a host of illegal things. And other items were never factored in before - HANS, etc that have probably added over 10#.

The simple fact is 25% of the class can not make minimum weight and are at a disadvantage mostly through no fault of their own - just chose bad DNA. And I know several drivers who quit the class because they got tired of being so many pounds overweight with no hope of running further up the grid.

However, all things considered I would be happy with a 35# increase even though at my current 260# I come in at 50# over and I have lightest weight body sections possible.

35# could be easily added just by changing the weight plates from steel to lead (if allowed?) and adding a little more. And it seems Enterprises could help the issue by allowing weights in the center of the car in places - footwell, etc?

All for making the class more even - I know lots of drivers who can't make weight (I'm 90 over). I can see why the light guys don't want it, they loose an advantage. Increase the weight requirement and let everyone play on an even field.

Drivers come in all shapes and sizes, some of it can be controlled by the individual and some of it is genetics. So what's really fair to everyone? I don't think there is a solution that would make everyone happy, but adding weight to a race car after you have increased the h/p just seems like the wrong way to go on this one.

"but adding weight to a race car after you have increased the h/p just seems like the wrong way to go on this one." Enzo you left out part of the formula - should be - adding some weight to a car after you have increased HP AND reduced weight 110# just seems like the right way to go.

Look at it this way:

1. Current = 1670#/103 HP = 16.2 #/HP
2. New engine no weight change = 1560#/120HP = 13 #/HP
3. New engine + 50# weights = 1610#/120 HP = 13.4 #/HP - still a decrease of about 20% weight/power ratio

If weight isn't a performance issue why do Formula 1 teams spend millions to find an extra 2 pounds and why are those cars much faster on light fuel loads than full - and they have sooo much more HP and sooo much less weight than our cars.

Also - over the years I have owned about 12 of these cars (maybe I'm not very smart) - and on most I did lots of work to get the body sections within a pound of minimum weight - and I noticed a variance of between 15-20 # in weight - and many years ago the previous enterprise regime admitted there were different chassis jigs and many chassis' had gone out heavier than usual and more importantly some had gone out lighter than usual. So that is an inherent unfairness beyond the control of most racers who may now have a heavier chassis.

OK - I'll try hard to limit my 2 cents worth on this subject - knowing I am up to about $1,000 dollars at 2 cents a time.