SCCAForums.com

I couldn't help but sign-up to respond on this issue.

1) I'm currently floating between ASP and SM2 (my rear Bose snake keeps me out of SP).  I have been at the auto-x scene for a little over 2 years now, and I think this may be my first semi-serious attempt at building a competitive car.  I know this doesn't really answer the question, but I wanted to illustrate where I stood as far as staying in SM2.  It really depends on what happens this year.

2) It seems that way, but I have to admit, I'm still unaware of a number of pitfalls in the class expressed by others on the forum and in person.

3) Takebacks are harsh, but there should be an equal distance between SP and P.

4) I don't think the rules/allowances would prevent me from running SM (or for most people) if it was my intention to max out my car that way.  However, I'm not particularly interested in engine-swapping, and SP is not aggressive enough for someone who wants to stick with bolt-on mods.

---

Mazda Rx-8, BS
Mazda Rx-7, SM2

sm2dan:

Just for comparison, Erik's 3-rotor 7 was measured at 72" wide. We measured our ex-NC MX5 with 285s also at 72" wide.  I believe he had 315s,

d 

Not that anyone would be stupid enough to add 400 lbs. of ballast to one, but an Elise with the new 275/30-15's would be 73" wide.

---

Robert Puertas
www.EvoSchool.com

Simple thought. I think we can boil racers down to two types: builders and buyers. S - SP is buyers. P is builders.

A buyer bolts stuff on, orders custom stuff that can be bolted on, and might use a hacksaw, die grinder, and drill press to modify stuff. They may or may not do all their own work, and many are very good mechanics.

A builder welds, fabricates, engineers, etc. They would choose to spend $80 in parts and 4-hours making control arms vs buying them off the shelf for $400. They'd much rather have the ability to relocate pickup points than try and develop something from stock points.

Right now I think the SM rules draw combination of both. At the top I think it's mostly top drivers who are buyers with advanced understanding of mechanics and what parts they need to have made to go fast, and have pockets deep enough to pay to have these parts made, or know how to mod existing parts to do the job. I don't think any of the top guys would want to build a P car from scratch, but I could be wrong. There are some builders in the class, and they're doing cool stuff, but I think they're a minority. I think the issue is, to be at the top of the existing ruleset you ultimately will have to be a builder who's willing to be heavily constrained by the rules. I think most of these types would rather save some money and go to P.

Do we want SM to be a builders' class or a buyers' class? I don't think it's going to survive as a builders' class once P catches up with the times. I think this is another reason we need to reel in the rules to a point where the type of folks at the top now (buyers with knowledge) will be the ceiling.

---

Randy Noll

I own 2 cars that could be good SM2 cars. RX7TT and a Solstice.

While I like watching SM2, I don't have the desire to mod my cars to a point where you "almost" can't put them back to stock condition. My TTRXR1 is something that I think will continue to raise in value as the years go by. I consider the design of that car something that will remain desireable for many, many years. Bolting on wings and messing with fenders is not what I want to do to that car.

Solstice is still under warranty and doing well in stock class so why not run it there?

While I would like racing heads up against Andy/Erik etc, I am going to stay on the sidelines unless I come into a lot of money. I have thought about messing the FD but figured it out would take $20K+ to get my car to a place where it could be a threat and I usually don't want to run class where I am not a threat.  

 But then again,  I spent quite a bit on the Solstice wheel/tire package(s) so maybe I am all messed up.

 FM Lillejord

fastmike:

 My TTRXR1 is something that I think will continue to raise in value as the years go by. I consider the design of that car something that will remain desireable for many, many years. Bolting on wings and messing with fenders is not what I want to do to that car.

 FM Lillejord

Beth and I agree with keeping the car as close to original as possible.  You don't have to chop on the RX7 to make it SM2 worthy.  The wing we have bolts to the stock wing location, and the fenders are stock except rolled inner lip.  It will fit 315's in the rear and 285's in the front.  Actually, a combination of Andy and Beth's car would be simple to make for SM2.  Single turbo GT35R with standalone ECU.  Use the suspension/wheel tire combo that we use that doesn't require much fender modification.  Do the usual suspension/differential/fuel/seat mods which we have posted on www.7parts.com.  Bolt on a wing and you have a competitive, fast, and relatively cheap SM2 car, that can be taken back to stock if you keep the turbos, solenoids, etc in the attack.  Come on, join the fun in SM2.

 Erik Strelnieks

---

Erik Strelnieks
93 3-ROTOR RX7
01 Honda S2000
05 SLK 350 AMG
08 BMW 135i

Thanks for the link Erik. I have never seen that website before. I will do some reading.

FM Lillejord.

 

Stan Whitney:

Andy Hollis:

As for wanting three SM classes (light, heavy, FWD), what would you pick if you only got two and why those two?  For now, the numbers don't support three. 

--Andy

SM light - 2.0L and below, no AWD, power adders allowed:

            FWD=1800lb, RWD=1900lb, Mid/Rear engined=2000lb.    This should be immediately appealing to the miata, honda, and elise/exige owners, and a great follow on for old CSP, ASP type cars.  Adjust slightly as needed.

SM heavy - Everything over 2.0L, rotary, and AWD.  Power adders allowed:

            RWD 2L-5L = 2500lb,   RWD 2L-5L Mid/Rear engined = 2600lb,   RWD 5L+/AWD = 2700lb

The large displacement, AWD, and rear engine weights could be raised some, but don't go crazy.  This keeps the current cars in the hunt (SM BMWs and SM2 Rx7's) but doesnt make every other format drive a tank.  Adjust slightly as needed.

 I like your thinking.

I'm in this class since I like to both autocross and HPDE's with it.

 

rnoll98:

Simple thought. I think we can boil racers down to two types: builders and buyers. S - SP is buyers. P is builders.

A buyer bolts stuff on, orders custom stuff that can be bolted on, and might use a hacksaw, die grinder, and drill press to modify stuff. They may or may not do all their own work, and many are very good mechanics.

A builder welds, fabricates, engineers, etc. They would choose to spend $80 in parts and 4-hours making control arms vs buying them off the shelf for $400. They'd much rather have the ability to relocate pickup points than try and develop something from stock points.

Great summary, I'm and engineer, so I'm a builder.

---

Polo Green 95 LT1 6-spd Chevy Corvette
Upgrading as stuff wears out and/or breaks
Autocross / Road / Drag in whatever class they decide to stick me in this week!
2000 CCM Group IIG Autocross Champ
Member: NCCC, NCM, SCCA, NHRA, CART

To anyone suggesting that SM/SM2 be combined into an new classifications like SM Heavy and SM Light, be aware that any weight increase to AWD cars would effectively be a takeback for the second year in a row.  I see AWD = 2700lb above in SM Heavy... this would drive me to XP because I don't want to add ballast to my car AGAIN for '08.

Just fair warning that there are AWD cars out there that could weigh MUCH less than 2700lb if allowed.  At least give us a chance to show we're competitive before legislating us out of existence.

Andy Howe
SM2 legal '96 Impreza (SM legal with ballast)



 

---

SM ~ '96 Subaru Impreza
Old Car: A Stock ~ 2000 Honda S2000

I'll leave the first four out since they've been well-covered already. I'm still happy with my comments on the other thread, and honored that they've been quoted/referenced by several people on this one.

rnoll98:

5) Current competitors: If SM went away, what would you do?

Turn the car back into something just the tiniest bit more "streetable" so it isn't frightening to drive above 60mph, add some brakes that can are up to the reality of 4x the power of the stock engine so they survive longer than a 60-sec autocross, and have myself a nice weekend street monster and HDPE car. The justification for this decision is mostly just 'cause I'd be throwing away a cool engine if I went down to SP, XP rules don't seem to be any more favorable to FWD than XP rules. (only 100lb advantage vs. a RWD with the same engine?), I couldn't possibly sell it for what I've got into it, and (fortunately) I still think it's a freakin' cool car to own.

Then I'd either purchase or co-drive a proven competitive car in a much more affordable class, and hold out a little hope that someday there might be an SM class that is friendly to FWD and doesn't explicity seek to penalize cars just 'cause of their age. (Note: I'm not looking for favors...I've been running a 1700lb car at over 1900lbs since 2003. The added 75lbs for 2007 was more insult than injury...perhaps more like the final straw)

...oh, I was supposed to wait until SM went away? DARN IT! I always forget to read the fine print.
 

rnoll98:

 

6) I don't think SM could get any closer to XP without combining them. So if SM went the other way and became more or less "SP with engine swaps", would you (current competitors) stay or would you (non-SM folks) be compelled to join?

I know I can compete against the FWD crowd, so a FWD-friendly class might work. But the bottom line is that I'll go back to SM if I think I have a snowball's chance to be competitive at Nationals...however the rules happen to work out.
 

I agree about the SM vs. XP issue. If you allow any cutting of the unit body, which is the main real difference between SM and XP, you end up with so many loopholes that you can't really take a "half-step".

But moving SM toward SP by itself doesn't seem like it is really going to work either. Why? Because the current cars are ALREADY THERE. I'd contend that my Scirocco was one of the more highly "SM-ized" cars out there, but it really only amounted to engine work and a whole lot of little tricks beyond SP. Things like bolt-on balljoint spacers, camber plates that aren't SP-legal due to hood clearance, mix-n-match factory gear ratios, etc. Nobody is running an X-TRAC gearbox. Nobody is running a crazy boosted 1.0L motor on jet fuel from an 80's era F1 car. Nobody (besides possibly myself) is running a stupid light car with 200lbs+ of ballast to make weight. Heck, only a few people are even running fancy Racelogic traction control, and considering it is only about $1k to install it I don't see that as the reason the class is struggling.

One could argue that the mere threat of the theoretical 1.0L turbocharged lightweight X-TRAC monster is scaring people away, but that itself is theoretical at best. I don't think simply removing that threat is gonna save the class.

I think that if it is really true that everyone agrees the SM concept seems like the right thing to do, then it deserves to be a real CATEGORY. ASM, BSM, etc... Conversely, it seems to me that if SP and or P have been declared as "broken", then they should either be "fixed" or simply killed. But instead, we're being all wishy-washy about the whole thing and doing a bunch of half-steps, which is just throwing out the newborn before it can really grow. SM doesn't get enough classes to make people want to build cars, while SP has now started stealing SM cars with new unlimited boost rules and XP scavenges those who have tire limitations. I'm personally starting to think that SP should continue just a little further toward SM as a means of fixing its outdated ruleset, while the XP bug should infect the rest of Prepared. And that might just remove the need for SM...

---

Team One Out

Borrowed 2004 Mazda RX-8
Solo B-Stock

probably something to consider...

a great majority of autocrossers dont/cant/dont want to own a trailer (and find trailer-queens intimidating). the same is true for the SM population. i'm sure there are a lot of local racers that are itching to even just watch our champs and forum posters in topeka and other major events. if there is a class for the target market 'SP rejects' (true streetable mods? its a long drive ya know) then you give them something to do to make the trip more enjoyable.

as before, i vote for the GT / Touring classing structure (just a mock up). it would put every shop/builder and top-end cars in one class and put up the greatest (brand and driver) battle in solo2 . yeah kinda like how people got drawn into spectating drifting and GT events. its the colors, tricks and prestige (and nicely built dream cars) that works for many "all-out mods racing" spectators and competitors.

Then theres the little joe SM sandbox called Touring/SM Lite(really streetable?) class.

---

Ed
SM2 82

I was very interested in SM2 until I got a bloody nose with "All Lotus' excluded".

 It's OK now though, that car will be legal in XP with 200 lbs added. You just gotta love adding weight to your car above it's stock factory weight.

LOL  a slap upside the head is better than a bloody nose.

 But that's OK too, I'm in CP where the rules are stable and the cars are fairly equal, abeit slow on HPT's asphalt.

 

Jesus

OK, maybe I didn't add much to this discussion, but my first sentence is really all I had to say.

---

Jesus Villarreal
D mod Europa

Hi Jesus,

 It is difficult, if not impossible, to equalize from the Lotus size/weight end of the spectrum all the way up to a Corvette, so someone will get the short end of the stick.  Imagine having one Prepared class and trying to equalize your Lotus with your CP Camaro.

 XP is trying to do something like that, though I think that class owe's much of its current popularity due to its newness and lack of dominating cars.  Eventually it will end up being dominated by an EM/DM lite car, IMHO.

 -Andy M.

boxboy:

Hi Jesus,

 It is difficult, if not impossible, to equalize from the Lotus size/weight end of the spectrum all the way up to a Corvette, so someone will get the short end of the stick.  Imagine having one Prepared class and trying to equalize your Lotus with your CP Camaro.

 XP is trying to do something like that, though I think that class owe's much of its current popularity due to its newness and lack of dominating cars.  Eventually it will end up being dominated by an EM/DM lite car, IMHO.

 -Andy M.

Hi Andy

I was just answering the question of what kept me from SM2,

Yes, I realize that it is very difficult to equalize cars that are very different in size. The short end of the stick would have been preferred to being excluded, It's all water under the bridge now, I've moved on. As you know, I have plenty of options, my nose didn't bleed for long. ;>))  

I applaud what you guys are trying to accomplish to keep the class going. I've seen classes go extinct because of peoples perceptions, In the early 80's,  BP was very popular in SFR, getting up to 15 competitors at most events, until the late 80's when a very good driver built a great car, The "I can't beat him in that car" perception, kept people from that class, fast forward to '00-06, and the same was true for the RX7's in that same class, we all know what happened there. SM2 needs to avoid that mentality to survive, whether some platforms get a weight penalty or you do what Jason Rhoades was kidding about, something has to be done. You must remember that when it comes to cars, sometimes the sum of the parts is greater than it should be, and sometimes the driver of said car is the multiplier that makes it exceed the actual sum, but it's very difficult make people understand that.

 Minimum weights that include drivers weight is a start, then if a particular car/engine combination are winning consistently, their weight minimum needs to go up, not a popular idea in my book, I hate that one, but, what do you do?, penalize the driver, that's even worse?

LOL Andy and Eric have to wear 10 lbs shoes and a 50 lb beer gut. hahaha. J/K

Jesus

---

Jesus Villarreal
D mod Europa

The first thing the club needs to decide is whether it is more important to save the few currently invested or to save the concept.  If you worry too much about saving the former you may never get where you need to to save the latter.  In other words you may have to piss off the current crop of serious competitors with radical rules restructuring (i.e. serious take backs, model-by-model listings and minimum weights, a willingness to let inexpensive small, light, forced-induction-with-stock-block-and-crank cars be the class of the class)  if the category is to survive.  If you try to accomidate the existing (small and shrinking) customer base with band-aid solutions that really don't address the underlying issues you're just accomidating them right out of a class anyway.  

 

The whole SM concept was originally embraced by a couple types of people; those with turbocharged cars that wanted to boost the fock out of them and those with inexpensive normally aspirated cars that wanted to add forced induction and then boost the fock out of them.   SM no longer is the prefered refuge for these people.  We probably lost some of the "I wanna run more boost on my o.e. turbo car" to SP with the boost rule change.  At the same time, the SM rules sometimes seem down right hostile to the guy running a supercharger or turbocharger on an otherwise stockish engine.  To me a big deterent is the fact that a highly complicated normally aspirated engine swap often gets to run at a significant weight advantage against a the same car with stock engine plus FI.   The class should put "plug and -play" solutions ahead of the "marvelous feat of engineering" solutions.  The actual rules often do the opposite.  Take the ever-popular miata:  When the rules dictate that a miata with a supercharged or turbochaged stock-block, stock-crank engine and stock transmission has to run 140lbs heavier than a miata with a race-prepped 2.5 liter V6 that was orginally mounted transversly in a FWD sedan, takes a friggin' boat-load of fabrication to fit, and is mated to a $10,000 sequential race transmission is there any wonder there's a participation problem?  Especially when said forced-induction, stock-engine miata has to ballast up 250-300 lbs from its SP weight to make the minimum. 

IMHO, the rules need to change from "engine swap centric" to "boost centric."  I think there's much more of a market for a "SP with aftermarket forced induction" class than there is for a "wild engine swap in an almost but not really steetable car" class.  Reduce or eliminate displacement modifiers for forced induction on stock block, stock crank engines.  Add weight penalties for engine swaps.  If said engine swap "requires" a transmission that is not stock on either the car its going in or a car that the engine came out of, allow it but add another weight penalty.  If the stock engined cars with boost (be it o.e. or aftermarket) end up with a moderate power-to-weight advantage over the engine swap cars then the formulas are right.    

---

Once you go Mac, you never go back!

I don't get what you're saying Gary - the cars that won both SM and SM2 last year were running more-or-less stock engines with some help in the FI department, how do the rules not favor them?

In the trip to SM, I went to a lot of trouble turbocharging my (stock block, stock crank) 4-cylinder motor to get the power I felt was needed, as I didn't feel a normally aspirated motor from my manufacturer of ~1.4 liters greater displacement would cut it, even with a fair bit of internals work.  From my point of view, the rules are somewhat "boost centric", or at least favorable, to small boosted motors.  It depends a lot on the manufacturer though - if my car was GM product, I'd find a way to get an LSx motor to fit one way or the other since it's such a simple way to complete the powerplant puzzle.  Some motor mounts and a driveshaft for a motor that makes a reliable 500/500 with a few bolt-ons, is nothing in comparison to the hassles in designing, implementing, and living with the maintenance of a turbo system, especially on a platform that wasn't boosted to begin with.

 I really don't get the whole Miata example either - the turbo motor, if done right, will make a bunch more tq and hp than the 2.5 NA motor, certainly not beyond the bounds of what's usable, so shouldn't it have to weigh more?  The transmission thing is equally applicable to the FI or NA situation, unless you're proposing some sort of weight penalty for custom transmissions?

 I don't really see the actual implementation of crazy motor swaps as having an impact to participation.  Vic swapped in a mostly-stock E46 M3 motor, and Erik's (errr, Beth's) car was out of comission for a couple years getting the 3-rotor swap.  Besides that, there are probably a few swapped Civics out there, but that swap is easier than the 30k mile service in some cars.  None of the swapped cars were on top at HPT last year, so your proposed changes to punish cars with swapped engines and transmissions are only hurting the cars that already aren't winning (though they were rather close ).  It's not going to get the rest of the field to stop "shrinking", because their actual deltas to the leaders won't have changed.

Unless the cause for defection is a perception thing, that this change will somehow help.  I was never so good at that stuff, where's DG when you need him???

---

--Jason Rhoades

Actually, for the record Gary Thomason's C5 in 2005 contained a "swapped" engine. Which was a stroked HC LS2 with a final 402 displacement. The weight of the car was around 2900 lbs, which by 2007+ weight ruleset is about right. ((6.7*200)+1600=2920#s).SLP made this "bolt on" block that you can drop into an C5 or C6. With a good cam, good flowing heads and exhaust this motor was well capable of running anywhere around 400-450+ RWHP. This motor swap didn't require any "special" transmissions or differentials. One great thing about chevy is all thier parts are made to withstand high amounts of power. Except the differential outshaft which was wise to upgrade to a stronger one, this breaking makes a lot of damage (seen it).

No one, that I know of, has decided to FI an LSx and run in SM2. I have seen a 402 FI built just recently, for Drag applications which the final power output was around 800 RWHP. NOTE: this was with a Twin Turbo Setup. Ironically even though FI on such a large motor, that produces a Sh!tload of power, still has the same min weight of someone with a NA 402 which is 2900#s. The only problem with running that much power is putting it down, which seems to be a common problem for any car pushing over 400 RWHP at HPT. Its only a matter of time before someone try an FI LSx, obviously with pockets so deep they reach China.

Too bad the SuperVette didn't make it to Nationals, I think that Popp would have given Erik and Andy a run for thier money. Although now, that SuperVette would be illegal due to the new weight rules. It also contained a "swapped" motor (427) and a weight of around upper 2600#s... (Is that correct Erik?)

 

Michael

 

 

---

Michael "MrPickles" Feldpusch
#144 SM2
Broomfield, CO
rmsolo.org
lefthandracing.com

MrPickles:

Actually, for the record Gary Thomason's C5 in 2005 contained a "swapped" engine. Which was a stroked HC LS2 with a final 402 displacement. The weight of the car was around 2900 lbs, which by 2007+ weight ruleset is about right. ((6.7*200)+1600=2920#s).SLP made this "bolt on" block that you can drop into an C5 or C6. With a good cam, good flowing heads and exhaust this motor was well capable of running anywhere around 400-450+ RWHP. This motor swap didn't require any "special" transmissions or differentials. One great thing about chevy is all thier parts are made to withstand high amounts of power. Except the differential outshaft which was wise to upgrade to a stronger one, this breaking makes a lot of damage (seen it).

No one, that I know of, has decided to FI an LSx and run in SM2. I have seen a 402 FI built just recently, for Drag applications which the final power output was around 800 RWHP. NOTE: this was with a Twin Turbo Setup. Ironically even though FI on such a large motor, that produces a Sh!tload of power, still has the same min weight of someone with a NA 402 which is 2900#s. The only problem with running that much power is putting it down, which seems to be a common problem for any car pushing over 400 RWHP at HPT. Its only a matter of time before someone try an FI LSx, obviously with pockets so deep they reach China.

Too bad the SuperVette didn't make it to Nationals, I think that Popp would have given Erik and Andy a run for thier money. Although now, that SuperVette would be illegal due to the new weight rules. It also contained a "swapped" motor (427) and a weight of around upper 2600#s... (Is that correct Erik?)

Michael

No, 2720's or so.  Bob's car will have to get heavier in 2007 anyway,  with the SEB's banning of Titanium/Carbon non-OEM brake rotors. 

Erik

---

Erik Strelnieks
93 3-ROTOR RX7
01 Honda S2000
05 SLK 350 AMG
08 BMW 135i

1:  I was is SM2 with a Honda CRX with a motor swap.  I had fun, but was b-slapped by a lot of Vettes.   The following season, I removed the drivetrain and swaped it into a 1991 Civic hatchback which placed me into SM.  The cars are basically the same, same weights, same motor and relatively the same chassis. Now I am more competitive. 

3:  Rules stability is VERY important.  Keeping things stable allows for the driver to focus on the Driver and not the construction of the car.

4:  The SM/SM2 merger is a good idea to me for a lot of reasons.  If you combine the classes you eliminate the structuring problem of 2 seats vs four.  Now you have all of hte SM cars in one class.  Now, since all of these vehicles are not competitive with each other, divide the class by drive.  This would create SMA(wd), SMR(wd) and SMF(wd).  The drive-type would be as the car sits, not as stock.  (Someone I am sure can make a Civic into an AWD vehicle or take a WRX and make it just RWD)  This would split the FWD's away and resolve the competitive issue.  The RWD's and the AWD's can be combined into one class or remain in two separate classes.  Not 100% sure how that would work.  If people want to compete against each other, then they can go into a PAX or PRO class. 

Leave the rest of SM rules alone.  Most of the rest of the preparations are good.  Keep in mind, this is a MODIFIED class.  There are going to be things that you should be able to do to a car to modify it.  That is the nature of the beast.  However, there is a fine line, that even I am not sure where it is, about keeping the spirit of STREET in there.  People drive 10 second Mustangs on the street.  Not sure if it is a good idea, but they can and they do.  Where does the STREET come into play any more?  Should SM cars be prohibited from being trailered in?  Street tires only, no slicks?  If I were to drive my car on the road and have it 100% street-legal, I would have to lengthen my exhaust (and either change out springs or wear a mouth guard).  Should SM cars have to be 100% street-legal to retain the STREET in the name?&