SCCAForums.com

The members of the SMAC met with the SEB for a very short discussion about the future of SM/SM2 based on this year's Nationals participation numbers. It's no mystery that the numbers are bordering on pathetic.  The question is.....why?  There were various reasons thrown out, but these are from people that are actually at Nationals, not from those that aren't attending.

 So the question becomes.....If you are a current SM2 driver or builder or were one and got out recently, what made you either not come to this year's Nationals or why did you get out of the class altogether?

We really need details if possible.  This is your time to rant about where the class is heading, how the rules are progressing etc.  If you're dissuaded because of the increasing expense, the fight you'll have against some top drivers or what?  Please let us know. 

To make it as blunt as possible, we're in deep #$@$^!.  If next year does not make numbers like this year, the SEB will do whatever it takes to change things around to increase participation.  This can include anything from combining the classes SM and SM2, changing some current rules (weights, aero, exclusions etc.) and even extinction.  We really don't want this to happen.

I am guilty of not running in SM2 this year so I'll start.  I'm in the process of building a car.  Will it be nationally top level competitive against the current crop?  Who knows.  I have no idea, but i know my fight will be huge the longer I give Erik and Andy to continue building their 7s.  But i'm not scared, I won't jump to XP or to a stock class, i love SM2 because it actually does allow me to have a scary fast car that I can drive to the local grocery store for a 4-pack of Red Bull (about the only thing I could fit in there).  I couldn't find a co-drive in SM2 to help keep the numbers up so I entered SS instead.

Please let us, the SMAC and the SEB know what we're doing wrong or what we're doing right.

Thank you for your time :)

Dan

---

Dan Pedroza
CS 72/172
2008 Nationals CS first loser
Defending 2009 Nationals CS first loser

sm2dan:

I'm in the process of building a car.  Will it be nationally top level competitive against the current crop?  Who knows.  I have no idea, but i know my fight will be huge the longer I give Erik and Andy to continue building their 7s.  But i'm not scared, I won't jump to XP or to a stock class, i love SM2 because it actually does allow me to have a scary fast car that I can drive to the local grocery store for a 4-pack of Red Bull (about the only thing I could fit in there). 

Ditto exactly what I quoted above.

---

Project 350z
Nissan Leaf

Dan,

 

I moved from SM2 to XP purely due to the lack of suitable DOT tires for smaller high performance cars - and rules limitations that made it unrelistic to run larger diameter tires.  Since DOT tire manufacturers seemingly have no interest in building wide tires with less than 23" diameter - I don't forsee '90-'05 Miatas or other cars with limited tire clearance having much interest in SM2 in the future - unless rule changes are implemented.   I can think of a few potential rule changes that would encourage participation of smaller cars:

 1.  Allow road race slicks in SM/SM2.  If such a rule were in place - my car (and probably a few others) would still be in SM2.  In addition, I believe a number of additional cars currently without viable tire options would enter the classes.

2. Allow modification of inner fenders for tire clearance.  This could possibly be an alternative to #1 - although simply allowing slicks but keeping the fender rules as they are seems like a simpler option that would open less cans of worms.

 
3. Tire width limitations.  I think this would be pretty difficult to implement, as the top dogs would IMHO have to give up quite a bit of tire to even the playing field.

I also believe the requirement to match engine block manufacturer to car manufacturer is hurting participation.   This rule seems unnecessary and arbitrary - given current business relationships in the automotive industry and the popularity of inter-marque engine swaps with car enthusiasts.

I'd be happy to write a letter to the SMAC/SEB if you want - just let me know.

 
-Steve
 

---

Steve Garnjobst
This Year: '02 MR Spyder in STR (Thanks Andres!)
Next Year: '99 Miata in DP
http://www.mnautox.com/

sm2dan:

So the question becomes.....If you are a current SM2 driver or builder or were one and got out recently, what made you either not come to this year's Nationals or why did you get out of the class altogether?

We really need details if possible.  This is your time to rant about where the class is heading, how the rules are progressing etc.  If you're dissuaded because of the increasing expense, the fight you'll have against some top drivers or what?  Please let us know. 

 I'm not at nationals because I nuked 4 engines in 2 years.  The latest of which was 1.5 months before Nationals on a 2 month old engine.  I was willing to put up with the monitary/labor aspect of the class because I thought the car had some potential, at the DC and Peru Pros - I was consistantly the fastest car in SM2 at the 60' but was still left at the lights by the AWD SM cars.  I too liked having a scary fast low 11 second car. 

But that is not why I've left the class.  I'm leaving because of the rules instability and changes that directly negatively affected me.  I drove a mid-engine car and it seemed that every single time I turned around and read the fastrack I was getting screwed by a rule change (or a proposed rule change).  The biggest was changing my weight to be the same as an AWD car.  Seriously...  Half the drive wheels but same weight (not that I would get down to the minimum but the flawed thinking of the rule makers left me stunned).  At that point a mid engined car had not won a single national event.  Then there was the body panel attachment change that was labeled a "clarification".  The constant subframe maybe/maybe-not change that put out for comment multiple times.  I mean it went out once - was rejected - so you put it out again hoping for a different response.  It seemed like there was someone on the SMAC with an agenda.  I could go though all the letters I sent to the SEB on member comments but I'm not going to bother.  There is a very heavy anti-mid-engine bias so why should I continue to campaign that kind of car.  Then, if I'm going to change cars, where can I run where I won't have to worry about some rulemaker screwing me over because they have bias and want a change to the car they are campaigning.  So it's back off to stock I went.  I left with a very sour taste in my mouth too. 

I also didn't like the direction the class was headed.  If I wanted a pure racecar, I would have went prepared.  And that is the direction that I see the class headed.  It's not SP with engine mods, it's P with interior carpeting and a dashboard. 

Well that's my couple of cents worth. 

---

Rob Leone

'07 Solstice GXP in AS
'86 MR2 in DM (LeMons car)
ex - '91 MR2 Turbo in SM2 <- If you can't set a good example, serve as a horrible warning.

I have to agree with this one but it's not the reason that I left. I personally left SM2 purely because of lack of tire availability.  I can't run with the big dogs on 225s, and nothing else with a DOT stamp worked under my car.  That said, the rules have not maintained the original intent of the class IMO.   Some combination of XP and SMx seems to be in the very near future or they may both die.  They are very close right now and appeal to people with similar philosophies.  It's a quaint notion to think that the a SMx car can be driven to the grocery store, but the fact is that cars like Andy's, Eric's, and Vic's aren't street cars and are maybe a set of slicks away from being front running XP cars.  It's not their fault, they just built cars to the letter of the rules and they turned out to be much closer to race cars than anyone involved in the original SM ruleset envisioned. 

There's probably only room for 1 or 2 classes that I'd categorize as 'high tech' builder's classes.  SM, SM2, and XP are not all going to make it in the long run. I personally hope XP makes it since the small cars can most likely be competitive there.

 

SpyderVenom:

I also didn't like the direction the class was headed.  If I wanted a pure racecar, I would have went prepared.  And that is the direction that I see the class headed.  It's not SP with engine mods, it's P with interior carpeting and a dashboard. 

---

Jeremy Schuster
Autox - Turbo Miata XP #27
RR - Phoenix CSR

I don't see a fundamental problem with the class rules.  Sure it would be nice to have more tire choices, but I knew the limitations and rules when I bought the car.  Is a Miata the "right" choice for SM2?  It may not be for everyone, but it was for me.  I do drive mine to the grocery store, to pick up one of the kids at school, to lunch, whatever.  The current aero expirements I am running do draw some looks though.  There is nothing like a 40 something year old guy in a Miata with a wing and racing seat to draw snickers.  My initial interpretation of the SM/SM2 classes was kind of "run what you brung".  I don't know it that was the original intent, but it was what attracted me. 

 

Certainly some restrictions are in order, but as others have stated, lessening some of the restrictions might bring more participation.

 

Participation is low in our local SM2, with only 4 drivers running 5 or more of our 11 events so far this season.  SM is pretty healthy with 19 drivers running at least 5 of our 11 events so far.  We have a local expert class that draws the bigger budget cars and more talented drivers. The SM2 representation there is 9th behind  2 FSP drivers, 2 DSP drivers, and STS guy, an AS, and a CM and one driving mixed classes.  His highest pax has been a respectable 985 with an average of 965.  The X class leader is averaging 999 pax in an FSP Scirocco.  The leading driver in SM is only averaging 949 points.  Are our local results typical?  I don't know. 

 

So how could we draw others to the class?  Is it the cost keeping them out?  Both are good questions.  Our local SM2 hotshoe is certainly investing what it takes in his Corvette and is a remarkable driver.  Will people spend that kind of money verses a fraction of it on a "better" paxing car?  I would rather drive the Vette than the Scirocco.  Until recently, the Vette actually pulled a trailer to the events and didn't arrive on one.  The Scirocco arrives on a trailer all the time.  The “S” in SM/SM2/FSP/DSP is not really about Street anymore.  Of the top 10 drivers in our region by points only half drive their car to the event the rest arrive on trailers.  Okay the CMod guy has an excuse.

 

I am not suggesting that the PAX is wrong or that our results are typical.  After a certain level people are competing for the title not just enjoying the car.  Give SM and SM2 an equivalent pax to STS and people will flock to it.  AGAIN THAT IS NOT A SUGGESTION OR COMPLAINT ABOUT THE PAX. 

 

SM/SM2 is a tough class.  Those that play there know the rules, know the costs and enjoy having a place to play.  There are already rules in place to handle classes with low turnout.  Certainly those of us who have SM/SM2 cars are true enthusiasts, why would the powers that be eliminate our class.  Modifications to the cars are a large part of the fun for me. 

 

If the intent is to build participation there are lots of answers.  Part of the equation may be outside the rules and even the SCCA.  Maybe its just a sign of the times.  Fewer people dumping less money into highly modified vehicles.   Nearly equal performance is available off the assembly line with much higher resale potential.  These classes are about people who like to play with cars.

 

Why am I not at nationals this year?  The car is just barely ready, if indeed it is, but I am not.  I will see you there next year.

 

 

 

---

Chris
89 SSM

It's too bad the SCCA has nothing other than entrant counts to go on to quantify class participation.  Perhaps a more useful meter would be the sum of a quantitative assesment of the car preparation and driving abilities of all class entrants.  In my eyes anyway, SM2, even in its present state of relative infancy, would garner a much larger sum than would a number of longer-running and much more highly subscribed classes.  I hope that in time the powers that be realize that for classes such as this, having 15 (even modestly) well-built SM2 cars is a much greater success than having 45 A/B/C/SP cars with carbon hoods and cams.  The effort it takes to build and develop a proper SM car above and beyond SP is not trivial, and there needs to be leeway for this.

I think the temporary decline in participation is due to people simply realizing that what it takes to be competitive in the class is greater than whatever car they already have plus a couple SP-illegal bolt on mods.  The "romance period", like the one XP is presently experiencing, is over, and only those with the requisite level of commitment are left.

 Myself, I've been looking to get into the class with a car of my own since getting a taste of it last year.  I've been waiting to see and experience the new Topeka pad before finalizing platform choice upon what I believe to be an efficacious modality.  Unfortunately, based on what we've seen so far, I don't think the most conventional and least expensive sportscar platforms to build upon (middle-heavyweight front-engine/rear drive with high powered engine, as most of my ideas were) will ever be the best choice as long as we're on this surface.  I don't think this helps things.  Likewise, people in the know saying things like "we're in deep $%&#^%" doesn't exactly encourage one to break open the pocketbook either.

Despite personally disagreeing with the chassis/engine block restriction, I think the SM formula has a niche in autocross, and I hope it sticks around for a long time.  SM is seeing perhaps its greatest depth of competition ever this year, I'd like to see SM2 given some time to hit that same stride.

---

--Jason Rhoades

ChrisSwearingen:

 The SM2 representation there is 9th behind  2 FSP drivers, 2 DSP drivers, and STS guy, an AS, and a CM and one driving mixed classes.  His highest pax has been a respectable 985 with an average of 965.  The X class leader is averaging 999 pax in an FSP Scirocco.  The leading driver in SM is only averaging 949 points.  Are our local results typical?  I don't know. 

Just to note, the local SM2 representation that Swearington mentions didn't drive his SM2 car the whole year. So those numbers are not quite a good benchmark for local pax'n. ( 2 events in an STS civic, 2 events in a GS Mini, 1 event in a BM Radical, 1 event in a FM thing, 1 event in a BSP M3, 1 event in a SS C5 Vette ). Only the mini was truely prep'd to the limit of the class.

I know, as everyone is reading this they are pointing fingers at me and saying "But you ran BP in Topeka". That is true for being at the town-hall meeting and hearing that BP is in danger due to numbers, I wanted to help the class out. Mainly that I have  been considering preparing my car for BP in the next year or so, and wanted to do my best to try to keep the class around. BUT! I did fill my spots in SM2 to help keep those numbers up as well. It seems that SM2 is where BP was at last year.

Unfortunately with SM or SM2, the class identification should be $M and $M2 for its basically a competition who has the biggest pocket. I wish I had money to properly develope a SM/SM2 car. But I don't and I work 2-3 jobs during the winter to help maintain my budget on car developement. I bet if the price of Carbon Fiber came down, SM2 participation would go up. It would have been interesting to see the results if Popp could have it made it out to Topeka driving Bob's SuperVette. One thing I do like about SM2 are the drivers that participate in that class (Andy, Eric, LJ, Bill, Popp, Dan, Scotty, Gary, and the rest of the gang). Its nice when you are surrounded by great talent for its a good benchmark of how good I am as a driver. Plus I have always had and have a great time driving in SM2, even when my car breaks down. Thanks to LJ and Bill for giving me the most sh!t this past week in Topeka. :)

Someone mentioned that SM/SM2/XP will be eventually melded into one class. So far, XP doesn't allow tube frames (to my knowledge) which mostly all other Prepared classes allow. In that respect, SM2 and XP are basically the same class with some minor class rule differences.

Suggested Additional rules:

FENDERS: 

Allow rear-inner fender modifications (eg: Mini tub) that will allow wider tires in the rear of the car without having flares wider than the course itself. Stipulation of this rule, is that you can ONLY modify the inner fender if it doesn't effect the rear suspension and mounts. As well as any structural change to the subframe. Also, cap the "Inner fender modification" at no more than 2 inches in, from the original fender width.

TIRES:

Since slick sizes basically max out at 15 -16" , perhaps allowing slicks for the smaller diameter rim sizes. I shopped for slicks(BP future) that would fit my car(vette) and there is non to be found unless I make modifications to the brake rotor diameter sizes (eg: making them smaller).  So cars running the larger diameter rim 17"+ will not have the ability to run the slicks. This will balance things out for the smaller cars like Miata's. Most cars in SM/SM2 run 17"+ rims

WEIGHT:

The new rule (from what I read) suggests that min weight is determined by the following: (displacement * 200) + 1600lbs(SM2) is your min weight with the max being 2900 lbs. With those numbers Gary's car would be at 2940 (which he was 2920 last year). I know that with this formula, Erik's and Andy's car weight is roughly what it is now. The forced induction cars (with the new rule set) will have to add a 1.5 displacement penalty, in the formula to determine min weight. I feel this penalty for foced induction should be tougher. For Erik and Andy's Mazdas basically put out as much if not more power than my normally asperated 6.7 litre puts out and has a min weight of 2700 lbs (roughly). Right there, the Mazda's have the advantage on weight to power ratio. Even the lightest possible Corvette can only get down to 2750 give or take. And thats with Carbon Fiber everything and Titanuim everything (thus driving the cost up). Suggestion: Make the Forced Induction penalty 2.0 or 2.5. This way those cars that can put out as much as any normally asperated motor, should have a closer min weight.

Thanks for the time reading this and I hope the participation grows with whatever changes or mofications the SMAC makes to the SM/SM2 rule set.

Take it easy
Michael

---

Michael "MrPickles" Feldpusch
#144 SSM
Broomfield, CO
rmsolo.org
generic-racing.com

MrPickles:

Unfortunately with SM or SM2, the class identification should be $M and $M2 for its basically a competition who has the biggest pocket.

That was the first thing I thought of when I originally saw this thread.  I don't think a sport like Solo can sustain classes like this in any great numbers, particularly when you can't even be sure your investment will be long term due to new car classings and rule changes. 

Don't get me wrong though, I've always liked the idea of these classes.  I absolutely love watching the Sias, Tunnell, Strelnieks, Mckee, etc... machines run.  But, I think they've become way too expensive for most of us with a few of the top builders creating basically serious full-on race cars .  

Dave G. 

talon95:

MrPickles:

Unfortunately with SM or SM2, the class identification should be $M and $M2 for its basically a competition who has the biggest pocket.

That was the first thing I thought of when I originally saw this thread.  I don't think a sport like Solo can sustain classes like this in any great numbers, particularly when you can't even be sure your investment will be long term due to new car classings and rule changes.    

Dave G. 

This is so true at the national level, but locally SM/SM2 is the class many new Autox'rs show up with to try the sport but have over-modified their cars.  This class gives them a place to play without forcing them to compete with the mod cars.  Local participation should be kept in mind also, IMHO.

I can't tell you how many people I've seen bump up classes to get away from the good stock drivers.

---

Ted

2003 C5 AE Coupe AS
2004 Z16/Z06 SS

talon95:

That was the first thing I thought of when I originally saw this thread.  I don't think a sport like Solo can sustain classes like this in any great numbers, particularly when you can't even be sure your investment will be long term due to new car classings and rule changes. 

A mod is the worst offender here, drawing six drivers with only two who have a chance of winning.  The Bowland car is cool, but is it worth making a class just for them? 

 

 

talon95:

MrPickles:

Unfortunately with SM or SM2, the class identification should be $M and $M2 for its basically a competition who has the biggest pocket.

That was the first thing I thought of when I originally saw this thread.  I don't think a sport like Solo can sustain classes like this in any great numbers, particularly when you can't even be sure your investment will be long term due to new car classings and rule changes. 

Don't get me wrong though, I've always liked the idea of these classes.  I absolutely love watching the Sias, Tunnell, Strelnieks, Mckee, etc... machines run.  But, I think they've become way too expensive for most of us with a few of the top builders creating basically serious full-on race cars .  

Dave G. 

I think you may be surprised if you asked how much it would cost to duplicate Vic's, Bob's (Tunnel and not Kasprzyk) and Andy's car.  It would be less than a stock Elise. 

---

Erik Strelnieks
93 3-ROTOR RX7
05 SLK 350 AMG
08 BMW 135i

ErikZ06:

I think you may be surprised if you asked how much it would cost to duplicate Vic's, Bob's (Tunnel and not Kasprzyk) and Andy's car.  It would be less than a stock Elise. 

No, I honestly wouldn't.  But the stock Elise is still worth decent money even if not competitive in a national solo class. 

Honestly not trying to be negative about the classes, just offering my opinion.  You asked! 

Dave G. 

ErikZ06:

talon95:

MrPickles:

Unfortunately with SM or SM2, the class identification should be $M and $M2 for its basically a competition who has the biggest pocket.

That was the first thing I thought of when I originally saw this thread.  I don't think a sport like Solo can sustain classes like this in any great numbers, particularly when you can't even be sure your investment will be long term due to new car classings and rule changes. 

Don't get me wrong though, I've always liked the idea of these classes.  I absolutely love watching the Sias, Tunnell, Strelnieks, Mckee, etc... machines run.  But, I think they've become way too expensive for most of us with a few of the top builders creating basically serious full-on race cars .  

Dave G. 

I think you may be surprised if you asked how much it would cost to duplicate Vic's, Bob's (Tunnel and not Kasprzyk) and Andy's car.  It would be less than a stock Elise. 

Hey Erik :)

I have a hard time believing this statement. I noticed how you didn't bother to mention your car in this statement :) I'm not whining at all... just a realization I had on the amount of money I've spent on my car these past two years..and still not even close to fully prep'd for the class.

Golf was still a blast

Michael

 

 

 

---

Michael "MrPickles" Feldpusch
#144 SSM
Broomfield, CO
rmsolo.org
generic-racing.com

I think the sunset criteria may need to be adjusted for the heavy prep classes, maybe a lower count (to reflect the high time/cost investment needed), or more time from any major rules adjustement, before declaring the class not viable.