April Fastrack

[MARKP]

My thought is this. The class is casting a different net to catch a different type of fish. It does seem that they are trying to think toward the future of what new cars will be like. I think this is good.

I think you also have to ask...."How many people would have gone to ST* if something like the propsed ruleset was available?" I think a lot of people would not go to ST if this were offered.

People keep saying things like this will bring new people in. From where? The new people come from local events. They don't start at national stuff. Write a rule for local events and LEAVE IT THERE. ST was supposed to be a national ruleset to apply to local stuff. It was not supposed to be national but the people that built cars for it asked for it to be a national class. Did it bring a bunch of new people to national competition? When I look at the fast guys in ST, I see a lot of names that came from other categories. We may have increases on the local level but, IMO, what ST has done is pulled national competitors from other categories, not increased participation any more than what it would have been if left alone.

ST is here now. We can't say there wouldn't have been a need for it if we had done this earlier. That ship has sailed. To eliminate stock and basically make it ST lite, just doesn't make sense to me.

[steverife]

I also have a theory that one of the primary issues with stock isn't the ruleset, but the specialty/trunk kit cars that are needed to win (perception or not) --- Club Ricer in BS, the theoretical ZOK's and MS-R's in CS, the Shelby GT's that killed the diversity in FS, the ridiculous trunk kit that got powerplayed into HS, etc, etc, etc.

[thrdeye]

My thought is this. The class is casting a different net to catch a different type of fish. It does seem that they are trying to think toward the future of what new cars will be like. I think this is good.

I think you also have to ask...."How many people would have gone to ST* if something like the propsed ruleset was available?" I think a lot of people would not go to ST if this were offered.

People keep saying things like this will bring new people in. From where? The new people come from local events. They don't start at national stuff. Write a rule for local events and LEAVE IT THERE. ST was supposed to be a national ruleset to apply to local stuff. It was not supposed to be national but the people that built cars for it asked for it to be a national class. Did it bring a bunch of new people to national competition? When I look at the fast guys in ST, I see a lot of names that came from other categories. We may have increases on the local level but, IMO, what ST has done is pulled national competitors from other categories, not increased participation any more than what it would have been if left alone.

ST is here now. We can't say there wouldn't have been a need for it if we had done this earlier. That ship has sailed. To eliminate stock and basically make it ST lite, just doesn't make sense to me.

Yeah, but part of what I'm trying to say there is that ST continues to grow and catch new people, and I think some of those people that end up there would be attracted by "STREET". You are right, the fast guys are not new...no one that is really fast is "new"...well, there are a few outliers - Collett, Littlehale, the STU champ 2012, but anyway....I used STF as an example, and I understand that is said and done, but just trying to make a point that people that considered a class like STF would probably strongly consider this "STREET" class first.

I believe that you also have to keep in mind that the BoD played a role as well. It was quite obvious that no one was happy about declining stock participation, so I'm sure the SEB was tasked with doing something

[flier129]

Wait, so they'll allow any mod needed to get the same alignment adjust-ability and not just camber-plates? I'm with Gary on this, it could easily change the geometry on a handful of cars, giving them an advantage.

ECU modifications are strictly traction/stability control issues, correct? I know burning a new spark/fuel table onto my dad's 2012 GTi stock ECU will net him 40whp/70ft-lbs lol.

Either which way, my 94 R would be competitive any of these classes......http://greenville.craigslist.org/cto/3694124095.html

[thrdeye]

Wait, so they'll allow any mod needed to get the same alignment adjust-ability and not just camber-plates?

Uh, no. you should probably read it.

[integra55]

I copied this from a posting of a letter a member is planning to send ... ( I personally think that option #2 is the best .. since option #1 doesn't address all the concerns ) ... there is much more to his letter, but this, for me, was the most pertinent


THE EASIER OPTION: Implement the following changes in the current stock class...
- SS, AS, FS run on R-comps, everyone else on street tires (this reflects the different needs of different types of cars).
- Limit to ONE sway bar adjustment.
- Allow strut cars to use camber adjustment devices (and reclass those cars accordingly).
- Leave the shock rule as-is.

This will lower the cost of competing and the cost of entry for most of the stock class participants, while retaining the "fun" in the higher horsepower classes.


THE LESS EASY OPTION: Create 2 categories...
I know we have been weary of adding categories/classes because we do not want to dilute competition. However, fact is that there are VERY PASSIONATE supporters on both sides of the R-comp/Street tire debate. And the supporters of street tires tout the benefits as being lower running costs and lower barriers to entry. What this tells me is that this is not a zero-sum game! Having a Street-stock category AND a Race-stock category does not mean that both end up with half the current participants. It means that we will get a bunch of new participants AND retain current participants! Isn't growth the idea? And when done without sacrificing "fun", that is a win for everyone.

So the new category structure could look something like this (the names can change... what I have used is just for illustrative purposes):

1. Street Stock
2. Race Stock (Current Stock category)
3. Street Prepared (Current Street Touring)
4. Race Prepared (Current Street Prepared)
5. Race Modified (Current Street Mod)
6. Prepared
7. Modified

Doing so, we end up with a structure that has a low barrier to entry, limits the impact on existing participants, and creates a progression of classes that makes sense.

[MikeKelly]

( I personally think that option #2 is the best .. since option #1 doesn't address all the concerns )

<snip>

1. Street Stock
2. Race Stock (Current Stock category)
3. Street Prepared (Current Street Touring)
4. Race Prepared (Current Street Prepared)
5. Race Modified (Current Street Mod)
6. Prepared
7. Modified

OMG!

No offense Walter, but that's the biggest mess I've ever seen in my life.


Wait, maybe there was one that was worse (all carnage is not pictured)...

[dewittpayne]

Fixed rim width continues to be a sore point with me. Sure, I'd have access to more tires using an 18 inch diameter wheel, but I'd still be stuck with 8.5 inch wide rims even though wider rims would fit with no body modification. So I get camber plates and another sway bar. Big whoop. I'm still stuck with putting wide tires on too narrow rims. And people are lobbying to put the Boss 302 with 19x9 front and 19x9.5 rear wheels in FS! STX is out for me because the tire section width limit is too narrow.

Club racing is, if anything, worse than Solo about class inflation. Showroom Stock was originally a regional only class with a claiming price rule that was supposed to restrict spending on preparation. That didn't last long. The screaming was really loud when someone actually had the nerve to invoke the claiming rule. Prep levels went to the moon when it went National. It actually cost more to prep a Showroom Stock motor than it did a Production class motor because you had to hide all the prep work and have access to lots of parts to get matched sets. You couldn't shim valve springs to equalize spring rates, but you could search through parts bins to find a set with equal rates, etc.

[MikeKelly]

the biggest mess I've ever seen in my life

The sad part is that, in reality, it's only one more set of classes more than we already have...

[steverife]

Dear SEB,

This marks my 10th season of SCCA membership. I have attended national events since 2005 and have attended Solo Nationals the last 6 seasons (3 times in Stock, 3 times in Street Touring).

Having reviewed the proposal, I would like share some thoughts.

- I am a fan of race tires in stock. I do, however, recognize the growing push for a street tire “stock” class. Both choices have their positives and negatives.

- I like the wheel diameter allowance. Opening tire availability is a positive and something of a necessity with street tires.

- I have no issues with the tire specs.

- I am indifferent towards the shock rule, but see little to be gained by it.

- I’m not sure that I understand ECU tuning enough to make an educated statement regarding the traction control defeat, but my first impression is that I do not like the idea. I feel like this is a factor that should be considered when choosing a car.

- I am strongly against the idea of the allowance of sway bar changes on both ends. I feel like this could compromise reliability in the category, as people will run large bars that will put unforeseen forces on mounts and chassis points. I don’t feel like this is in the spirit of what we are trying to create.

- I do not like the camber allowances. I feel like this will create a “need” to run extreme alignments that are less than ideal on the street and will necessitate change before and after the event for street driven cars. I also don’t feel like this is in the spirit of the category.

- If we must open up camber allowances, it needs to be open to all suspension types.

- I do not like the idea of a limited prep street prepared. It isn’t fair to those currently vested in the street prepared category.

- Please amend any unintended consequences for any current Street Touring legal cars, such as the Jason Rhoades Camaro.

Overall, I was under the impression that the driving force behind the street tire in stock push was to simplify the class and make it more accessible. I feel like the sway bar and camber allowances would lead to unorthodox tuning practices and push the category in the opposite direction.

Thank you for your time,
Steve Rife

[thrdeye]

Good letter steve. I'm still out on the camber thing and I don't know what to think about LPSP. I think I'm going to write something about keeping SS as is in my letter. Not sure yet.

sent from typotalk

[steverife]

SS is really getting boned, but I'd kinda like to have an Elise and that is one of the few cars that I'd like to run on streets.

[gbwrx]

You do realize that your un-prepped stock car would have beaten everyone in Pro by about .5 sec at the last event using any multiplier that was discussed in that thread, right?

Actually with a .975 modifier, Shawn would have been in 5th position. With a .985 modifier, he would have been in 6th

Maybe I should have qualified it to say that would have been on his 4th run. I will give him a run to knock off the year of rust from not driving last year.

Personally I don't see any problem with that. Me beating you by .3 of a second on my 4th run is not far off from where we usually are. I would have only won by hundreths of a second counting my 4th run. Just look back at the results of my 1/2 prepped STi back in the day. I'm pretty sure that I won by over 1/2 a second multiple times with that car. Most of that is because the AWD has an advantage at PSCC since it is soo slick.

And, Ted...I know that I have never called you names. Not sure why you are calling me names. But, I will only say this one time.....DO NOT EVER DO IT AGAIN...and I'm fucking serious. While your being a smart ass...you may remember that I made a comment that I WILL NOT be at any national events. So, you are stating something that is already a known fact. Good job.

[John Brown]

ok,I had to go look.

nope! looks like you took a spankin in 2011. Oooooooh, your talking about back in the day?? yea, you beat them guys up purdy bad.

btw... whats all this hear about stocknoshitsgivenclass??? Had a long chat with Jr this morning... its gonna get even crazier I think... thank God I drive a lowly STS Miata.

[gbwrx]

ok,I had to go look.

nope! looks like you took a spankin in 2011. Oooooooh, your talking about back in the day?? yea, you beat them guys up purdy bad.

btw... whats all this hear about stocknoshitsgivenclass??? Had a long chat with Jr this morning... its gonna get even crazier I think... thank God I drive a lowly STS Miata.

Guess you missed the part that I was talking about driving the STi (2009 was the last year in that car...I'm pretty sure). Not a Miata. I was slow in that car.