SCCAForums.com

So 2600 lbs would be a doable weight. I would like the cars to be as light as they can be without exotics. That makes the cars funner to drive which would make the class more appealing IMO.
 

What does everyone think about Fender Flares for larger/wider tires?  The body is already fiberglass, cutting and replacing isn't really making the car too much lighter.   I found a some pix from the Corvette Forum of Rear Flares on a Coupe.  Nice car with a "tiger shark" front end that seems to allow more air flow into the radiator.   Would body mods like this be acceptable?  Replacing fiberglass with fiberglass shouldn't constituted a "competitive advantage" and allowing more air to move over/through the sadiator is more on the "Safety Mod" for not hurting a motor in a 2 driver car!

 

Here is another Coupe with Front & Rear flares.  This one does have a Front Air dam
 

 

---

joel villarreal
39 CP
126 ASP
www.americanauto-x.com

Wouldn't it be easier to move the AWD cars instead of making BP into a BSP Corvette Class, with the rules proposed you've excluded cars that were built to run in BP, ie: Rick Browns '90 BP Corvette. Rewriting the rules to make a one car class doesn't seem a viable option and I'm betting some of those "Older Corvette's" that used to run BP, would give the C5's a run for their money. BP started out as purpose built cars some were Road Race cars reworked to auto-x and some like the Rick Brown/Larry Park car were purpose built for the class, excluding these cars would be a mistake.

---

Doug Hubbard
# 20 AS
Sacramento Chapter

Doug,  when Chris created this thread, my original thought was to bring back BP the way it was before all of the Turbo'd RX7's showed up.  They are smaller, lighter and capable of big horsepower.   AP seemed to be a better fit for the RX7. I don't know what numbers were for BP & AP before then, that might of played a role for a BP Destination?  Now, CP has a similar problem/debate with big money-developed-cars vs budget-minded-developed-cars.  

I like Chris' idea of making a semi-budget class, but it's hard to do so when you're in Prepared.  These are cars that are supposed to be highly developed, however, one competitors idea of budget is different than the next competitors.  Larry Park built a KILLER Car for 1990.  I remember, as a kid, that car stirred up quite a fuss.  So what do we do as a group?  My attitude is that this is a prepared class and if you don't want to develop the car or spend the money then go play somewhere else.   OR just be happy and drive the piss out of whatever you have.  AND, why should we be limited to SP-esk rules in a Prepared class?  But, we have to ask, what does everyone else want?  There is No more BP as we knew it.  From my couch, it's easy to say that BP Competitors stopped attending and let the class die instead of keeping numbers up and getting the RX7's out! 

 
If we allow all corvettes, will the older ones show up?

If we create a new C4-C5 budget class, will they Show up?

Do we giver BP Classic a second chance or make them run in XP?

Isn't the Park/Brown Car considered "tube-frame"?  What are the rules for XP?  Oh that's right, a highly developed Prepared class that doesn't allow Tube Frame Chassis.  Doh!!!!  I'd fall back to an original BP class WITHOUT RX7's.  Everyone else is welcome.  I want to see BP back as a national class & would like to build a C5 if the class is resurrect.  Now, if we could only get a good surface to run Nationals on. 

 
-joel

---

joel villarreal
39 CP
126 ASP
www.americanauto-x.com

jvtex:

Doug,  when Chris created this thread, my original thought was to bring back BP the way it was before all of the Turbo'd RX7's showed up.  They are smaller, lighter and capable of big horsepower.   AP seemed to be a better fit for the RX7. I don't know what numbers were for BP & AP before then, that might of played a role for a BP Destination?  Now, CP has a similar problem/debate with big money-developed-cars vs budget-minded-developed-cars.  

I like Chris' idea of making a semi-budget class, but it's hard to do so when you're in Prepared.  These are cars that are supposed to be highly developed, however, one competitors idea of budget is different than the next competitors.  Larry Park built a KILLER Car for 1990.  I remember, as a kid, that car stirred up quite a fuss.  So what do we do as a group?  My attitude is that this is a prepared class and if you don't want to develop the car or spend the money then go play somewhere else.   OR just be happy and drive the piss out of whatever you have.  AND, why should we be limited to SP-esk rules in a Prepared class?  But, we have to ask, what does everyone else want?  There is No more BP as we knew it.  From my couch, it's easy to say that BP Competitors stopped attending and let the class die instead of keeping numbers up and getting the RX7's out! 

If we allow all corvettes, will the older ones show up?

If we create a new C4-C5 budget class, will they Show up?

Do we giver BP Classic a second chance or make them run in XP?

Isn't the Park/Brown Car considered "tube-frame"?  What are the rules for XP?  Oh that's right, a highly developed Prepared class that doesn't allow Tube Frame Chassis.  Doh!!!!  I'd fall back to an original BP class WITHOUT RX7's.  Everyone else is welcome.  I want to see BP back as a national class & would like to build a C5 if the class is resurrect.  Now, if we could only get a good surface to run Nationals on. 

-joel

Park/Brown car at the Nationals by some is considered a "Tube Frame" car, But from having been around the car from day one and helping work on said car---the car has a "Stock Frame" and at the Nationals those who said it was "Tube Frame" never looked at the car--they assumed it was.  I believe if they bring back BP it should be just as open as it was before--if you want to build a C-5 and run BP you should be able too.  XP the suppossed catch-all class was a joke from the beginning with all the rules set in place to make it a fair class--not one BP car could run XP without a significate change to the car.

Bring back BP, hell even let the RX-7 back in, but make it even across the board.

 

---

Doug Hubbard
# 20 AS
Sacramento Chapter

not one BP car could run XP without a significate change to the car.

You make some excellent points, including the one about XP.  But, BP never had the buzz (and entry count) that XP does right now, so I wouldn't hold my breath for major changes soon...

But, your statement above is not true.  Non tube frame BP cars can run in XP unchanged if they haven't wholesale replaced thier floorpan or firewall.  And, if they did, they can run in XP for a few more years at the former BP weight, which is admittadly not a great option, but pretty far from the myth that "Corvettes are banned from SCCA!!!!!" that is floating around. 

IMO, the BP Corvettes earned what they got by boycotting Nationals (judging from entry numbers,for 10+ years)  I'd highly recommend other classes who have "issues" *cough BSP* don't follow the boycott path, the ending is not pretty. :(

DaveW

Totally Unofficial

 

You know, I started thinking about the proposed prep level, and realize that such a car (C5 anyway) is competitive in today XP. 

Our car fits almost all the desired specs. DOT tires, stock shortblock (added heads and cam), lightly modded stock trans, stock suspension pickups, stock arms and uprights, normal lightening + cage.  Apart from the XP specific aero changes, and a mixed success flirt with traction control, the car is really simple.  It even ran stock brakes until late '07.

So....  there is a home even today, just need to build it.  Will you dominate?  probably not.  Will your success be course dependent? yup.  Will you curse the existence of smaller lighter cars?  always!.  But you will have a blast driving your V8 machine, and if you keep your head, hands, and feet working, you should stay in the trophies or better.

I know most will say XP is without limits, but the physics of weight, contact patch, Cg height, and power apply to everyone.  You have the advantage of cheap, reliable V8 power, low Cg, and lots of contact patch.

 

Stan, your car is an excellent example of what I was thinking the class could be. Sure would be cool to see that class on a national level.

The Park car is over prepared for my concept of what the new BP  should be.

 

Chris 

CHRISFP78:

Stan, your car is an excellent example of what I was thinking the class could be. Sure would be cool to see that class on a national level.

But as Stan said (and has demonstrated), his car already has a class. 

---

Steve Garnjobst
#75 XP
'99 Mazda Mutant

MNbiker:

CHRISFP78:

Stan, your car is an excellent example of what I was thinking the class could be. Sure would be cool to see that class on a national level.

But as Stan said (and has demonstrated), his car already has a class. 

He also said he probably can't win it either. 

Chris,

 

What else needs to be discussed before you present it to the board?   

---

joel villarreal
39 CP
126 ASP
www.americanauto-x.com

Howdy, 

jvtex:

What else needs to be discussed before you present it to the board?   

Where to go have a beer after they finish laughing?

Mark

marka:

Where to go have a beer after they finish laughing?

Mark

 

poke! They wouldn't laugh at us?  

---

joel villarreal
39 CP
126 ASP
www.americanauto-x.com

marka:

Howdy, 

jvtex:

What else needs to be discussed before you present it to the board?   

Where to go have a beer after they finish laughing?

Mark

He who laughs last, laughs best 

CHRISFP78:

He also said he probably can't win it either. 

It depends on what kind of surface Nationals ends up on after '08.  On concrete, it could get interesting....

---

Steve Garnjobst
#75 XP
'99 Mazda Mutant

Are you smoking something good?   Sorry, but with the incredibly low weights in XP Stan's car doesn't really stand a chance.  If he wins it will be by outdriving everyone in the class by a big margin.  You have the same problem as SM2 in that is very hard to equalize a large car with a small one.  Given low weight, tiny size,  and good power, the little car is going to almost always win. Put it this way, when would you rather have Stan's car than an 1800lb Elise with 350whp?

I would think the process for this class would be the same as any other.  Demonstrate interest and a ruleset.  Get people to build cars.  Petition to have the class run as Supplemental at National events.  Then if the numbers are there you get your class...

 
-Andy M.
 

boxboy:

Are you smoking something good?   Sorry, but with the incredibly low weights in XP Stan's car doesn't really stand a chance.  If he wins it will be by outdriving everyone in the class by a big margin.  You have the same problem as SM2 in that is very hard to equalize a large car with a small one.  Given low weight, tiny size,  and good power, the little car is going to almost always win. Put it this way, when would you rather have Stan's car than an 1800lb Elise with 350whp?

-Andy M.

Andy, you are not helping me with the sale of the car after this season   By the numbers, the big car should not be able to keep up, but somehow it stays in the ballpark.  Just need to have a good 1st day one of these years.

Sorry Stan, but the weights are a personal peeve as I think the class has alot of attraction, but is just too skewed towards a tiny light car.  We've already got EM/DM, so I don't see the need for the weights to be so low.  However, I understand the difficulty in making a weight scale apply to such a large range of potential chassis. 

 In any case, given the depth of the class (like many others), a well prepped and driven car will trophy even if it is not the optimal choice for the class.  And sometimes it will even win. 

 -Andy M.
 

boxboy:

Sorry Stan, but the weights are a personal peeve as I think the class has alot of attraction, but is just too skewed towards a tiny light car.  We've already got EM/DM, so I don't see the need for the weights to be so low.  However, I understand the difficulty in making a weight scale apply to such a large range of potential chassis. 

 In any case, given the depth of the class (like many others), a well prepped and driven car will trophy even if it is not the optimal choice for the class.  And sometimes it will even win. 

 -Andy M.
 

The weights are a pet-peeve to me too. But I think they should be lower across the board. Slightly lower for little cars, and MUCH lower for wide cars. I'd suggest a displacement x total tire width formula.

FWIW, my peeve is that I'll have to add hundreds of pounds over the stock weight with a nearly stock displacement engine to make my Lotus Europa legal for XP before I even start taking advantage of any of the weight-loss allowances. 

---

Aut tace aut loquere meliora silentio.

My take on XP is that there almost needs to be something separating the light cars from the heavier cars, sort of an XP-lite and XP-full size(BP). However, the numbers right now don't justify splitting the class.

AAS continues to offer BP, and usually we get 4 or 5 Vettes, and a few times a year we get 6 or 7, but it's not consistent. So, the question remains, if you give them a class, will they come??

 Jesus

---

Jesus Villarreal
D mod Europa