SCCAForums.com

BTW - I'm not sure the G35 is really equal to the 350z in terms of this discussion.  It has a little less power and weighs more than 300lbs more.  And I'm sure that 300lbs isn't all in the back seat.

Just FYI.

 

---

'91 ITB Civic DX

The G35 has the same power, but it is heavier and I think it might have a little softer suspension as well.

---

Brian Davis, 89 Civic Si, 158 STS

If I said "all" 2-seaterswere rwd, someone would point out the FWD Lotus Elan.  If I say "most" you take exception with that.  There have been a lot of responses as to why your idea isn't a good one, but you refuse to accept them.  There ARE 2 seaters that could blow a great class apart, and you can't always predict which ones they will be.  You can't include cars in a class, let people spend the money to prep them to the limit of the rules, dominate, and when you realize you're wrong, say "Oh, sorry, we were just fooling when we added your sports car to ST_.  Now go play in SP."  The membership won't let you do that.   

Stock is the "expensive Car of the year" category.  SP is the "Expensive and unstreetable modifications allowed" category.  ST is the "relatively inexpensive, relatively stable" category.  Let the ST cars that dominate continue to do so for the sake of stability on the National level.  You seem to be intent on a path that could really #@*& up the progress ST has made in its short history.  Do whatever you want in your Region, but leave things alone at the National level! 

Sometimes rules makers have to decide to piss off the fewest members.  I'm absolutely sure that your proposals will piss off more members than leaving things as they are.

---

Charlie Davis
Old age and treachery...

Charlie Davis:

  There ARE 2 seaters that could blow a great class apart, and you can't always predict which ones they will be.  You can't include cars in a class, let people spend the money to prep them to the limit of the rules, dominate, and when you realize you're wrong, say "Oh, sorry, we were just fooling when we added your sports car to ST_.  Now go play in SP."    

And see, the point you and others seem to be missing is this....  And I'll just copy/paste your post and make one change...

There ARE 4 seaters that could blow a great class apart, and you can't always predict which ones they will be.  You can't include cars in a class, let people spend the money to prep them to the limit of the rules, dominate, and when you realize you're wrong, say "Oh, sorry, we were just fooling when we added your turbo AWD car to ST_.  Now go play in SP." 

Now, for the last time... Why does the amount of seats matter?  We've already agreed that there are 2 seaters that are dogs out there, and some 4 seaters (with 4 doors even) that are stinking damned fast.

What if the EVO X just plain DESTROYS STU????????  What is the difference between that heppening and a 2 seater doing it?  You keep saying 2 seaters could upset the class but you dont explain HOW simply having 2 seats will cause a class upset.  Truth is, a 4 door sedan might upset the class just as badly as any 2 seater could.  PLEASE understand that this is the whole point of the discussion.  Don't just tell us that 2 seaters might tumble the apple cart, tell us how thats any different than the potential of the new EVO or new STi rolling that cart over.

This = my last post on the subject.  Its just too frustrating.

 

---

'91 ITB Civic DX

I think a lot of us have given good reasons to not include 2-seaters in ST classes.  But the bottom line is that the SEB and STAC make the rules.  Write your letter to them.  Make it very logical and tell them why it should happen.  You can't believe how many letters essentially say "I want "X" to happen, therefore it should" or "I can't compete, so I want my car re-classed" without any supporting data to tell them why this is a good idea.

If and when your proposal sees the light of day, we will all have our option to write our opinions on it.

 

---

Charlie Davis
Old age and treachery...

Agreed.  You're looking for answers, getting all frustrated, and wondering why you're not changing all our minds with attrition and repetition.  You may have a good point, but you need to go to the right place to get your answers.  Maybe they will answer your "why's" and "how come's".

---

Patrick Washburn
STU Evo
www.winghats.com

And I believe it starts with the local region, where you can start gathering data on whether or not they really would be faster or not and THEN present this data to the SEB/STAC.

That's how STS started in the 1st place.

--kC

(Hopefully, NER will have some data by the end of this year since S2Ks and 350Z are now allowed in STU locally.)
 

---

"Engine and transmission must remain unmodified, including emissions equipment, except as noted below"

Very late to the thread, just read it.  I have a small point to make. 

 You don't see SS owners pound their fists for a street tire class NOT because many of us wouldn't want one, but because we generally see it as a pipe dream that will never happen.  I might be the only SS competitor that's even read this thread!   

 Me, personally, I'd LOVE to run my Elise in a street tire class. Would save me a fortune on A6s and I could leave the trailer behind for local events.  Doesn't matter if you include limited slips or not.  You can pick up a fine 2005 Elise with no LSD for 32K right now. 

 Just don't assume there's no demand.  There would be plenty.

---

Jer
#196 ES
#187 SS retired

Surferjer:

 

You don't see SS owners pound their fists for a street tire class NOT because many of us wouldn't want one, but because we generally see it as a pipe dream that will never happen.  I might be the only SS competitor that's even read this thread!     

 Me, personally, I'd LOVE to run my Elise in a street tire class. Would save me a fortune on A6s and I could leave the trailer behind for local events.  Doesn't matter if you include limited slips or not.  You can pick up a fine 2005 Elise with no LSD for 32K right now.

I know Andy Seipos would join you in wanting such a class. Your smaller tires/wheels offer potential cost-savings and other SS folks would be looking to avoid hauling around monster tires/wheels and changing tires. I've been simply astounded that my 255/40-18 Falken RT-615 have lasted a full year on the RX-8 with autocrossing included...and I've been driving around on the virtually bald front ones for several months with no sign of cord...leading me to believe that even shaved versions would last a really long time. Now Bridgestone is even offering a pretty good contingency + member deal...except it should give bigger discounts to guys with bigger tires, perhaps paid for by giving smaller discounts to the small tire guys whose tires last forever anyway. 

 Just don't assume there's no demand. There would be plenty.

You are dead on that there would be plenty of demand. But here is the problem:

14 classes (Prep & Mod)..................13 classes (Stock and ST)

14.5% of competitors...Dixie NT...............58.5% of competitors

13.2%.....................Houston NT...........69.8% (50% in stock alone!!)

18.9%.....................Huntsville NT..........62%

While you guys prolong arguing over the consolidation of dissimilar new cars (except STS2 and '89 Civic) into 4 currently popular classes, you ignore the fact that there is plenty of room and demand for more stock and ST classes because competition numbers would GROW, instead of being diluted. It couldn't be clearer that the few guys running in P and M classes are not going to jump ship to go play in stock or ST. They are completely irrelevant to the overall number of viable classes. Don't necessarily pick on them...but also don't use them to claim too many classes and diluted competition if you add more. If you think in terms of 35 current classes it may sound like too many. Instead, think of the 21 remaining classes after excluding P & M. They are the classes where competitors are most likely to jump ship and migrate elsewhere...but they also constitute as much as 80% of current competitors and a far higher number of potential ones.

How many of you SCCA guys who have businesses would avoid producing popular products?????????? How many would stay in business catering to 20% of your customers.

Cole:

How many would stay in business catering to 20% of your customers.

I know better than to answer this... I know better, AHHHH

Everyone that has bought something from a company, is a customer. 100% of the people that buy from a company are customers. How can you only have 20% of them when everyone that buys something constitutes... 100%

Did you mean to say something else Cole? 

--kC

 

---

"Engine and transmission must remain unmodified, including emissions equipment, except as noted below"

Keith Casey - IMHO...:

Cole:

How many would stay in business catering to 20% of your customers.

I know better than to answer this... I know better, AHHHH

Everyone that has bought something from a company, is a customer. 100% of the people that buy from a company are customers. How can you only have 20% of them when everyone that buys something constitutes... 100%

Did you mean to say something else Cole? 

--kC

Good point KC. How about 80% of customers paying dues and sitting in coach, while 20% pay less in dues (ladies, junior, P & M total members) and sit in first class. Contingencies, bragging rights, etc.......

uh, SCCA dues and entry fees cost the same no matter what class you compete in.

---

Jeff Templeton
2000 Impreza RS

And you can also choose which contingencies to participate in....

---

"Engine and transmission must remain unmodified, including emissions equipment, except as noted below"

mugwump:

uh, SCCA dues and entry fees cost the same no matter what class you compete in.

Not true. One half of an SCCA couple is paying $20 spouse dues while First Gear and my dues combined equal $105....which is the same as family dues so I opt for the latter to include my wife, son and daughter as extra regional members, even though none other than my son participates.

An SCCA couple can enter two separate classes in the same car, thus doubling their chances of winning contingency monies and trophying without hurting the other's chances.

Keith Casey - IMHO...:

And you can also choose which contingencies to participate in....

Are you saying my son or I can compete for BSL or STUL contingency monies with greatly reduced competition levels? ; )

Cole:

mugwump:

uh, SCCA dues and entry fees cost the same no matter what class you compete in.

Not true. One half of an SCCA couple is paying $10 spouse dues while First Gear and my dues combined equal $105....which is the same as family dues so I opt for the latter to include my wife, son and daughter as extra regional members, even though none other than my son participates.

An SCCA couple can enter two separate classes in the same car, thus doubling their chances of winning contingency monies and trophying without hurting the other's chances.

Yes, how dare the SCCA help out families.  Shame on them.  Oh and you're paying only $26.25 per person while I'm stuck paying $80 or whatever it is, you elite fat cat you.  Which BoD member do you have in your pocket?!?!

Regardless, your entry fee and membership dues are the same whether you run stock or modified, which is the point.

 As for contingencies, dare I point out that the SCCA, while they manage some, is not responsible for them nor do they provide the money/products that are awarded through them.  I also might venture to note that there are more contingency options for categories like Stock and ST than P & M.

And lastly, how does having a wife who runs in Ladies "double" your chances of getting contingency money.  I can understand how it would double the cost of entry, but I wasn't aware that success in motorsport was a completely probablistic concept.  You of all people should understand how you can double the cost of entry by having another driver and still win nothing.  Then again, I suppose if you double zero you still have zero.  You clever dog!

---

Jeff Templeton
2000 Impreza RS

mugwump:

Cole:

mugwump:

uh, SCCA dues and entry fees cost the same no matter what class you compete in.

Not true. One half of an SCCA couple is paying $10 spouse dues while First Gear and my dues combined equal $105....which is the same as family dues so I opt for the latter to include my wife, son and daughter as extra regional members, even though none other than my son participates.

An SCCA couple can enter two separate classes in the same car, thus doubling their chances of winning contingency monies and trophying without hurting the other's chances.

Yes, how dare the SCCA help out families.  Shame on them.  Oh and you're paying only $26.25 per person while I'm stuck paying $80 or whatever it is, you elite fat cat you.  Which BoD member do you have in your pocket?!?!

Regardless, your entry fee and membership dues are the same whether you run stock or modified, which is the point.

Except that out of perhaps 15,000 Solo Members there might be 1,000 Prepared and Modified members (far less than NT or Topeka participation levels) paying about $60,000 in total annual dues excluding regional dues. In contrast, Stock and ST members probably constitute 65% of the total (more than NT or Topeka participation) or 9,750 members paying $585,000 in annual dues....or nearly 10 times as much. So a block of members 10 times larger, gets 1 fewer National class than P and M member classes combined. 

 As for contingencies, dare I point out that the SCCA, while they manage some, is not responsible for them nor do they provide the money/products that are awarded through them.  I also might venture to note that there are more contingency options for categories like Stock and ST than P & M.

And lastly, how does having a wife who runs in Ladies "double" your chances of getting contingency money.  I can understand how it would double the cost of entry, but I wasn't aware that success in motorsport was a completely probablistic concept.  You of all people should understand how you can double the cost of entry by having another driver and still win nothing.  Then again, I suppose if you double zero you still have zero.  You clever dog!

Looks like Hoosier gives away free tires to P & M guys too. In a class with a minimum of 3 drivers at a National Tour, there is a 100% probability that someone will win 2 free tires and someone else one free tire if all are on Hoosiers.

The SCCA is responsible for designating national classes which inevitably become the basis for awarding contingencies. As much as I respect SEB member attempts to remain objective, I very much doubt they turn down contingency monies won by their wives or themselves in less competitive National Ladies classes, or small Prepared classes....which creates the appearance of a conflict of interest in making or not making decisions benefitting the far larger majorities who lack such opportunities to win/trophy and collect contingencies. 

Thanks Cole.  You have completely derailed the discussion with an argument that has absolutely nothing to do with the question at hand.  I'd ask you what the choices of contingency sponsors has to do with ANYTHING in this thread, but I'm afraid the answer might make blood trickle from my ears.

But then again I guess everyone is good at something. <shrug>

 

 

---

'91 ITB Civic DX

Cole:

Looks like Hoosier gives away free tires to P & M guys too. In a class with a minimum of 3 drivers at a National Tour, there is a 100% probability that someone will win 2 free tires and someone else one free tire if all are on Hoosiers.

The SCCA is responsible for designating national classes which inevitably become the basis for awarding contingencies. As much as I respect SEB member attempts to remain objective, I very much doubt they turn down contingency monies won by their wives or themselves in less competitive National Ladies classes, or small Prepared classes....which creates the appearance of a conflict of interest in making or not making decisions benefitting the far larger majorities who lack such opportunities to win/trophy and collect contingencies. 

I can't believe I'm responding to this...

The SCCA designates the National classes but the tire manufacturers designate the minimum participation in classes for contingency awards.  It may be 3 entrants now but they can change it to 40 tomorrow which would eliminate most if not all of thier awards to L and M&P classes.  The manufacturers have chosen to keep than minimum low.

If the cost to give away one Hoosier tire is $100 (mfg cost) then they fully expect to recoup that from the competitors running thier tires at the event.  Maybe not at the event but over time because they are running their tires.  So even if they give away $300 in total tires per class, I can guarentee you that they've more than made that from the competitors in that class even if there are only 3.  It's a non-issue here for the competitor and for the Mfg it's simply good marketing.

---

Rob Leone

'07 Solstice GXP in AS
'87 Toyota Corolla in EP
ex - '91 MR2 Turbo in SM2 <- If you can't set a good example, serve as a horrible warning.

Another thread Coled away.  :)

---

Patrick Washburn
STU Evo
www.winghats.com