CAM Classes suck. Why would anyone want to be in one?

Discussions related to Solo
RxCritical
Posts: 1637
Joined: Mon Dec 20, 2010 8:31 pm
Location: Lenoir City, Tn

Re: CAM Classes suck. Why would anyone want to be in one?

Post by RxCritical »

:lol2: :lol2:
Paul M.
C8 #34 SS
Team Canopy
steverife
Posts: 9897
Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2003 9:55 am
Location: Knoxville, TN

Re: CAM Classes suck. Why would anyone want to be in one?

Post by steverife »

Broomwagon wrote: Sun Nov 03, 2019 11:33 am After several weeks of cogitation and study on the original post and all subsequent responses, I feel compelled to type (seriously, I read the CAM rules and a lot of Fastrack. Lots of wicked sarcasm in the SEB replies.)

I think the C8 Corvette, the Corvair and the Fiero need a new CAM class. Also the Ford GT can be included, but I don't think it's a real car as I've never seen one.

I propose CAM ?. The question mark is silent, CAM ? will be spoken only as a question by all announcers, participants and by-standers. Quizzical expressions are required when stating this class at registration and tech, lest you be disqualified for not understanding the nuance of an American built automobile with "european" sensibilities. The exception is that the owner can utter CAM ! or CAM it! when something untoward happens. Like fire.

The only additional requirement for CAM ? is that you have to have a functional fire extinguisher, especially as I've observed that Ferrari=mid engine=fire. The Fiero did nothing to dispel that notion.

I hope this adds to the discussion.🤨
That's fantastic! 8)
'16 FRS - PSTX 97
Post Reply