SCCAForums.com

matt says

 FYI - Many CP cars run between 16x10 and 16x12. However, for the newer CP cars (like my 2000 Trans Am), 17s and 18s are the logical choice. I run 17x11s. There are more than a few 18x12 wheels out there - expensive, but they're there. 17s or 18s are a must if upgrading the brakes. And upgraded brakes are a must if doing any road racing with these cars. So, removing the penalty for CP makes a lot of sense if you want newer cars to compete.

 

Not to pee on your parade but I don't see any reason why the rules should change just because someone wants a dual purpose car.  You seem to forget, there are about 50+ real CP cars floating around and participating around the country that have committed to 16x12 wheels and have more than one set.  If the bigger wheels are allowed, it is proven a bigger tire is generally faster so everyone will have to spend a large amount of cash to keep up.  Not to mention the price of the larger tires.

  

---

turbotoddie
todd farris
CP96

Howdy, 

turbotoddie:

Not to pee on your parade but I don't see any reason why the rules should change just because someone wants a dual purpose car.  You seem to forget, there are about 50+ real CP cars floating around and participating around the country that have committed to 16x12 wheels and have more than one set.  If the bigger wheels are allowed, it is proven a bigger tire is generally faster so everyone will have to spend a large amount of cash to keep up.  Not to mention the price of the larger tires.

Ok, I'll bite... Then why do EM/DM folks seem to be running 16" max diameter slicks?

Related to price of larger tires... Are they more expensive than the $450/ea 16" Goodyear radial slicks that are allowed now?

If all a class needed to survive was 50+ real cars, then I might not have an issue with your statement above.  But, obviously in my opinion, for a class to survive is has to constantly be attracting new folks to replace the folks that leave.  CP doesn't have the turnover that a lot of other classes do, but there are still folks leaving.  Who's going to replace those folks if nobody wants to join the class at the regional / "not particularly real" level because of archaic wheel restrictions?

Prepared has done a decent job in the past five years or so of updating its rules to position itself for another ten or fifeteen year period of rules stability.  The last remaining areas (to me) are to get with the times on wheels and possibly on traction control.

Mark 

Ok, I'll bite... Then why do EM/DM folks seem to be running 16" max diameter slicks?

 

I have no idea what that has to do with the conversation.

Related to price of larger tires... Are they more expensive than the $450/ea 16" Goodyear radial slicks that are allowed now?

I don't know, have you checked?  However, I have priced the wheels.  The status quo of no one spending radial dollars has ended with the advent of the Hoosier radial.  They are cheaper than anyone else's and didn't appear to have big performance at Natls but I expect them to be much better this year.  I am not one of the "my car is done, I don't want to change it' people but many large cost changes are being made at the same time.  Fuel injection is not cheap by any means and add wheels on top of that and I think few current cp (can't speak for the class formerly known as BP) entrants will upgrade.  They would probably sell and quit.

If all a class needed to survive was 50+ real cars, then I might not have an issue with your statement above.  But, obviously in my opinion, for a class to survive is has to constantly be attracting new folks to replace the folks that leave.  CP doesn't have the turnover that a lot of other classes do, but there are still folks leaving.  Who's going to replace those folks if nobody wants to join the class at the regional / "not particularly real" level because of archaic wheel restrictions?

I don't agree with your opinion because solo is not attracting new folks in any measurable amount these days.  I would think with all the rules instability in some of the categories is deterring many as well as the entry cost.  I do agree we need to make sure we are attracting new entries.  But, prove to me one of these regional guys that takes a late model  street legal regional cp entry and takes it the rest of the way.  I would think you would agree with me that most cp cars are built from the ground up from a shell in the junkyard.  So, I don't think the 'archaic' rules are affecting turnout or turnover.  As well, the wheel rule has been around long enough, if someone sells their CP project, another person may buy that project and have already overcome one of the largest entry costs to the class.  FWIW, since GT1 still uses a 16in wheel rule, used tires are abundant, radial and bias.  I not trying to preclude a certain car from competing but I think the needs of the many out weigh the needs of the few and the PAC/SEB should respect this in their decision.

Prepared has done a decent job in the past five years or so of updating its rules to position itself for another ten or fifeteen year period of rules stability.  The last remaining areas (to me) are to get with the times on wheels and possibly on traction control.

Wheels will be inevitable but I don't see them as necessary yet to CP but I hope traction control never gets to the class.  What is the point of having any skill if we allow traction control.  As well, it is another increase to the cost of being competitive in a class that is expensive now.  If you want an increase in participation, keep the cost of competition under control.

 Good conversation

 

 

---

turbotoddie
todd farris
CP96

marka:

Ok, I'll bite... Then why do EM/DM folks seem to be running 16" max diameter slicks?

---

Aut tace aut loquere meliora silentio.

Howdy,

turbotoddie:

 

Ok, I'll bite... Then why do EM/DM folks seem to be running 16" max diameter slicks?

 

I have no idea what that has to do with the conversation.

 

The DM/EM folks aren't restricted in wheels in any way.  If >16" diameter wheels/tires are such a threat, why aren't any of them using them?

Related to price of larger tires... Are they more expensive than the $450/ea 16" Goodyear radial slicks that are allowed now?

 

I don't know, have you checked?  However, I have priced the wheels.  The status quo of no one spending radial dollars has ended with the advent of the Hoosier radial.  They are cheaper than anyone else's and didn't appear to have big performance at Natls but I expect them to be much better this year.  I am not one of the "my car is done, I don't want to change it' people but many large cost changes are being made at the same time.  Fuel injection is not cheap by any means and add wheels on top of that and I think few current cp (can't speak for the class formerly known as BP) entrants will upgrade.  They would probably sell and quit.

The last time I looked for >16" diameter slicks I wasn't able to find any that cost more than the legal 16" radials (and no tires at all in a qualifying or otherwise soft compound that I'd expect to work in an autocross).  But... its fairly hard to find tires >16" at all, since >16" true slicks aren't all that popular with grassroots racing from the looking I've seen.

To me, the _real_ threat is a very expensive tire that's also made for autox.  And anyone could do that no matter what the wheel rules are. 

 

If all a class needed to survive was 50+ real cars, then I might not have an issue with your statement above.  But, obviously in my opinion, for a class to survive is has to constantly be attracting new folks to replace the folks that leave.  CP doesn't have the turnover that a lot of other classes do, but there are still folks leaving.  Who's going to replace those folks if nobody wants to join the class at the regional / "not particularly real" level because of archaic wheel restrictions?

 

I don't agree with your opinion because solo is not attracting new folks in any measurable amount these days.  I would think with all the rules instability in some of the categories is deterring many as well as the entry cost.  I do agree we need to make sure we are attracting new entries.  But, prove to me one of these regional guys that takes a late model  street legal regional cp entry and takes it the rest of the way.  I would think you would agree with me that most cp cars are built from the ground up from a shell in the junkyard.  So, I don't think the 'archaic' rules are affecting turnout or turnover.  As well, the wheel rule has been around long enough, if someone sells their CP project, another person may buy that project and have already overcome one of the largest entry costs to the class.  FWIW, since GT1 still uses a 16in wheel rule, used tires are abundant, radial and bias.  I not trying to preclude a certain car from competing but I think the needs of the many out weigh the needs of the few and the PAC/SEB should respect this in their decision.

We're looking to attract people from two pools.  #1, and probably the biggest contributer to the national scene, is existing autoxers.  #2 is regional folks looking to step up.

You and I may know that the best way to get into CP is to buy a car that's done already, but most of us learned that by building (or being in the process of building) a car from scratch.  There are going to be folks that want to come play in CP, and perhaps that's simply because their current car falls there.  The _first_ thing most folks with a performance pony car do for track/performance stuff do is upgrade the brakes (and/or play with the motor).  One of the attractive things about CP to a lot of people is that you can have a fun dual purpose car that doesn't give up anything on the safety department since the 'standard' CP car has a good cage in it and there are minimum weight rules to keep weights somewhere you can hit them with a cage.  But... All the dual purpose cars want bigger brakes.

And even if they never go any farther, the regional level _does_ matter.  Lots of folks at the regional level choose a class to run based on where they're going to be running against other folks.  Even if the entire class is made up of play cars at the regional level, they're all running in CP.  When one of them wants to step up the autox side of things, they're gonna more likely to want to remain in CP. 

The competitor that's most important to attract to National events to me is the guy in the back half of the pack.  In a class like CP, that guy is already coming knowing he doesn't have a snowball's chance in h*ll of even winning a trophy.  To attract him, you need to let him build the car he _wants_ to build, so that he can come run CP with the big dogs and have a really nice autox vacation besides.

You can take it too far of course.  We need the rules to still make sense when pushed to the edge so that they still make sense to the front half of the pack.

 But >16" diameter wheels aren't going to change the balance of power.  Heck, they're not even proven to be an advantage at all yet.
 

 

Prepared has done a decent job in the past five years or so of updating its rules to position itself for another ten or fifeteen year period of rules stability.  The last remaining areas (to me) are to get with the times on wheels and possibly on traction control.

 

Wheels will be inevitable but I don't see them as necessary yet to CP but I hope traction control never gets to the class.  What is the point of having any skill if we allow traction control.  As well, it is another increase to the cost of being competitive in a class that is expensive now.  If you want an increase in participation, keep the cost of competition under control.

 Good conversation

 

If wheels are inevitable, lets do them now.  Why wait for numbers & momentum in CP to drop?  Do you _really_ think a set or two of wheels is going to stop a currently serious CP competitor from coming out?  In a class where everyone pays a minimum of ~$1200 for a set of new tires, and perhaps as much as $2000?

On traction control, I tend to agree that I'd like it to stay away.  But its coming... Its already at the point where if a cheater wants to run it they can and it'll be hard to detect.  Rate of change systems seem pretty common these days and I don't see them becoming less common...

Mark

Wheels greater than 16" are allowed, you just get a 200# weight penalty.  Is the regional competitor with a dual purpose car put off by the weight penalty?  A 5.7L car with 17" wheels has to weigh 3200#.  How many dual pupose cars can get to that weight.  The lightest min. weight I saw in the NASA CMC series is 3150# and most are well over 3200#.

---

Steve Hudson
DP Miata

Howdy,

stevemhudson:

Wheels greater than 16" are allowed, you just get a 200# weight penalty.  Is the regional competitor with a dual purpose car put off by the weight penalty?  A 5.7L car with 17" wheels has to weigh 3200#.  How many dual pupose cars can get to that weight.  The lightest min. weight I saw in the NASA CMC series is 3150# and most are well over 3200#.

CMC has a whole lot more restrictive rules that Prepared though Steve, and it includes the driver's weight in the minimum weight, making their weights artificially look about 200 lbs higher than they are in a Prepared context.

A "garage gutted" Fox Mustang with glass windows, steel hood, and a cage is a decent bit under the 2750 minimum weight in CP.  Ask me how I know.  :-)
 

And yes, as someone with a potential dual purpose car (cheap '99 z28), I'm running it in SM.  I could probably run it in CP and still be overweight, but I won't do it, because the idiotic wheel rules p*ss me off.  My attraction to CP for that car would be to ditch weight and make the car more fun to drive.  If I can't do that, I may as well stay in SM.

Mark 

Howdy,

Btw, let's remember something here...

The only reason to have a weight penalty for larger diameter rims is if there's a tire for those rims that will obsolete the current 16" tires.

I've been beating the "unlimited rims in prepared" drum for a long time.  I've looked for a 17"+ diameter tire that will beat the current tires.  I've challenged anyone to find me such a tire.

So far?  Nothing.  Not one tire.

Remind me again why we have this weight penalty?

Mark
 

Well Mark,

 I never insinuated that the regional guy doesn't matter.  Currently, they can run their <16in wheels and those that do are running DOT tires at the regional level.  I agree we need to attract these guys to stay in the class but they are going to make a choice at some point.  The same whether to build a over/under 5.0L car.  It is not feasible to think that you can take everything you already have and make it work.  As well, the region has the ability to modify whatever they deem possible.  I don't see where the rules should be changed to accomodate the ' I would build a car if we could do this' group.  IMHO, dual purpose cars are not justification for a rule change. 

 CCW's still fit over cobra brakes and most dual purpose brake upgrades are bolt ons not custom spindles.  For autox, I have never had anyone mention needing more brake. 

Between FI, oversized wheels and traction control, the CP budget will equal SM.  This is not conducive to increasing participation as evidenced by the lack of growth of SM/SM2.

 

Steve, would you make sure the PAC has seen both of Mark's and my discussions on this topic.

 

---

turbotoddie
todd farris
CP96

marka:

Howdy,

Btw, let's remember something here...

The only reason to have a weight penalty for larger diameter rims is if there's a tire for those rims that will obsolete the current 16" tires.

I've been beating the "unlimited rims in prepared" drum for a long time.  I've looked for a 17"+ diameter tire that will beat the current tires.  I've challenged anyone to find me such a tire.

So far?  Nothing.  Not one tire.

Remind me again why we have this weight penalty?

Mark
 

I bet it was a real hoot when you two were on the PAC together. :)

Mark:  Given the Topeka surface, many think that DOT R tires are pretty close to the current slicks.  No one knows yet how the radial Hoosiers will affect that balance.  Along your orignal line of thinking, a current 17" or 18" road racing radial slick compounded for road racing/Grand Am/Trans Am is going to suck on an autocross course.   I've tested the Hoosier Radial slicks and I can tell you the compounding is a completely different world than Bias.

Todd:  You mention costs of racing every other sentence, yet you run a high strung turbo motor.  If costs are that important, then maybe throw a small block chevy in that car. :):)

FI isn't going to add any cost to CP.  A Holley HP carb is $600.00 these days, and then you have to start modifying the fuel bowls and jetting, neither of which is free.   Do  you have any data showing FI making more power than a carb?   A guy on Corner Carvers has a motor built almost exactly the same as mine and was wondering why his made so much less power than mine.  I started plugging his data into my engine analyzer software and the minor differences in heads and CR made almost no difference, but putting a multiport injection manifold in place of my super victor cut it down by 100+hp IIRC  Driveability isn't going to make up for that. :)

IMO, despite Mark's phantom weight penalty argument (the "I won't run your class becuase there is a weight penalty for my wheels even though the car likely couldn't make the CP minimum weight including penalty until it was stripped beyond dual usefullness" is bogus), I'd like to see the weight penalty for wheels removed in CP.  We are going to need the new blood in CP, the perception is that prepared is anti technology.

 Keep writing those letters about this; seb@scca.com

DaveW

Howdy, 

turbotoddie:

I never insinuated that the regional guy doesn't matter.  Currently, they can run their <16in wheels and those that do are running DOT tires at the regional level.  I agree we need to attract these guys to stay in the class but they are going to make a choice at some point.  The same whether to build a over/under 5.0L car.  It is not feasible to think that you can take everything you already have and make it work.  As well, the region has the ability to modify whatever they deem possible.  I don't see where the rules should be changed to accomodate the ' I would build a car if we could do this' group.  IMHO, dual purpose cars are not justification for a rule change. 

 

C'mon Todd, I've used the "regions are free to make their own rules" get outta jail free card too...  You know the problem with that as well as I do.  That regional guy, running in his "Prepared, but without wheel restrictions" class now is locked into that region (and only that region).  You want to make it harder to get folks to national events?  That seems like a heck of a good way to do it.

And again, point the "killer" 17"+ tire out to me that you're afraid of here.  I didn't always have the opinion I have right now, and I was challenged by someone (Schotz and/or Gunn-Wilkinson I believe) to go find the 17"+ tire that was going to obsolete the current 16" slicks.  I couldn't find the tire.  As it stands right now, if wheel diamter were unrestricted I'd still run a 16x12 wheel on a balls-out CP car. 

DOT-R's vs. slicks and HPT surface is almost certainly a short term problem.  Even if it isn't, it just adds more reason to allow bigger diameter rims.  Who wants to run a CP car on a 275mm wide tire?

And Dave, getting a 4th gen camaro bird down to 3050 is no big deal.  Certainly it means you need to gut the car, dump the bumpers, etc., but the "dual purpose" car I'm talking about is a track day / CP car, _not_ a daily driver / CP car.  Even with the daily driver, if you're willing to give up some comforts and perhaps skirt the law a bit on bumpers, 3050 is doable.

Mark 

47CP:

IMO, despite Mark's phantom weight penalty argument (the "I won't run your class becuase there is a weight penalty for my wheels even though the car likely couldn't make the CP minimum weight including penalty until it was stripped beyond dual usefullness" is bogus), I'd like to see the weight penalty for wheels removed in CP.  We are going to need the new blood in CP, the perception is that prepared is anti technology.

Super Stock, Street Prepared, Street Modified are getting faster and faster every year. Is there any reason to hold a PREPARED back with the excuse of tradition / cost / obsolescence ? If PREPARED gets "slower" it will reduce participation over time and a few years down the line they may be forced to run a single catch all prepared class at least as regional levels. 

Also I assume that people who finally end up in prepared start with one of the theoritically slower classes like stock, street prepared etc.. and go to prepared because it is faster. 
Once they realise this is no longer true.. new prepared cars will just not get built.

"Dual-Purpose usefulness" is not something we should talk about at all. Any *serious* prepared class driver will not worry about running the same car on the track (atleast not seriously). Such a person is mainly a track-nut who is forced to run prepared when and if he autocrosses as thats the only class he can run in based on the rules.

---

Vinax
1994 BMW 325i FP AutoX car.
http://www.myfastbmw.com

 real hoot when you two were on the PAC together. :)

 Actually, we got along fine.  May not agree on everything but we can discuss things cordially.

 

-Todd:  You mention costs of racing every other sentence, yet you run a high strung turbo motor.  If costs are that important, then maybe throw a small block chevy in that car. :):)

The Turd isn't high strung.  It is overboosted for the amount of stock parts that are utilized.  I can't afford a small block that would make the torque the Turd delivers.

-FI isn't going to add any cost to CP.  A Holley HP carb is $600.00 these days, and then you have to start modifying the fuel bowls and jetting, neither of which is free.   Do  you have any data showing FI making more power than a carb?   A guy on Corner Carvers has a motor built almost exactly the same as mine and was wondering why his made so much less power than mine.  I started plugging his data into my engine analyzer software and the minor differences in heads and CR made almost no difference, but putting a multiport injection manifold in place of my super victor cut it down by 100+hp IIRC  Driveability isn't going to make up for that. :)

 Dave, I disagree with FI not adding to the cost.  Yes, a built Holley is around a grand.  A good FI system total package starts around $2500.  Once again, I am not so much concerned with the newcomers but the current entrants in Prep.  Yes, people can modify the stock systems but they can't touch the aftermarket systems.  As well, I don't remember mentioning FI making more power.  Your example of a guys FI motor is an example of what I am concerned about.  You say he wasn't making as much power as you because of his manifold choice but open FI allows him to use a better one than he chose.  My concern is that I haven't seen a throttle body limit that is similar to the 750cfm limit(if it still exists).  Now, I do agree that FI should be allowed.  But, if I could afford it, I would ditch my carb in a second for a real FI for the driveability FI affords.

I agree we need new blood but I don't think wheels are going to make anyone's decision past a regional level or an ESP/SM guy that is looking for some cars to race with at a poorly subscribed event.  I will check on the Goodyear compounds but, I do remember, in a 16, there was a compound that made a 240 seem hard in comparison.  My fear was that they wouldn't last and testing some used ones, I couldn't maintain enough camber for good wear.  I do think FI will do more for class population than anything.

---

turbotoddie
todd farris
CP96

 

C'mon Todd, I've used the "regions are free to make their own rules" get outta jail free card too...  You know the problem with that as well as I do.  That regional guy, running in his "Prepared, but without wheel restrictions" class now is locked into that region (and only that region).  You want to make it harder to get folks to national events?  That seems like a heck of a good way to do it.

 Point taken, but generally this guy isn't going to commit to running anything more than his region anyways.  I can't remember the last time I saw someone show up in a car that was mostly CP and make more than two events a year even, running some pax, novice or noncp class.  Unfortunately, this isn't where population growth is going to come from anyways.  Prepared is generally grown from soloists tired of chasing the car of the year, want a more free set of rules, want to get away from expensive r compounds that don't last, (name your reason). 

And again, point the "killer" 17"+ tire out to me that you're afraid of here.  I didn't always have the opinion I have right now, and I was challenged by someone (Schotz and/or Gunn-Wilkinson I believe) to go find the 17"+ tire that was going to obsolete the current 16" slicks.  I couldn't find the tire.  As it stands right now, if wheel diamter were unrestricted I'd still run a 16x12 wheel on a balls-out CP car. 

I would probably agree with you except the first car that shows up on them and kicks the crap out of everyone is going to cause a perception that you need those wheels to win.  Am I going to buy them, hell no.  But, some people might decide to leave the class if that is what it takes to win due to the cost.

DOT-R's vs. slicks and HPT surface is almost certainly a short term problem.  Even if it isn't, it just adds more reason to allow bigger diameter rims.  Who wants to run a CP car on a 275mm wide tire?

Agreed, HPT sucks ass!  However, where are all of these cars that are going to show up if we allow big wheels?  I don't think it is right or representative of the constituency to change the rules based on the desire for dual purpose cars.  Why aren't they running SM? ESP?  I have been around many different sanctioning bodies and the ones that are the most successful generally keep pretty stable rules.  As well, I don't think anyone is concerned how fast Prep is compared to any other class.  If that was the case, we would have all slit our wrists the last time a stock miata beat us!  The technology that is factory in so many of today's cars is superior to most of our garage skill and budgets.  So what if SM beats us, they have IRS, AWD, more power than us in some instances, traction control and even aftermarket ABS.  We are not racing them, we are racing each other.  In CP, we are still fielding 50-60 cars with the current economy.  The only classes that are growing seem to be the ST classes and if you ask anyone of them why they switched to that class you will probably hear that the limitations of the rules allow them to be class competitive on a reasonable budget.  I promise you guys, the main response deals with the cost of competitive tires vs # of competitive runs out of them. 

 

 

---

turbotoddie
todd farris
CP96

Todd,

FI doesn't have to cost $2500.  One could easily put together a Megasquirt based TBI system on the same good manifold that worked for them before for $1000.

Yes, some people prefer to open the SIAS tuning catalog (or whatever  :)) and say send it to me, no matter what it costs.

But people could do that before with a carb.  Call up Braswell or Quickfuel and say "send the best"

You can't legislate spending limits.  Almost every time it is tried, it turns out badly for the budget limited racer. 

IMO if people don't start getting into P classes (especially CP) at the regional level, even if they are class fillers, they will never get the bug to go divisional or national.  Or, if they do, it will be in another category.  If removing the draconian wheel limits helps this, then it helps the sport.

BTW, I used to be against removing this limit, but the more I dig into it, the killer tire doesn't exist and no one is going to compound one up for 50 parking lot racers to use in September. (IMO of course) 

DaveW

>FI doesn't have to cost $2500.  One could easily put together a Megasquirt based TBI system on the same good manifold that worked for them before for $1000.

 You are correct but the door is open for unlimited spending and the FI system quality goes up with dollars spent.  A top of the line carb has a stopping point around $1000-$1500 from any competent builder and they are in use already.   Let's be realistic, if someone is installing a megasquirt and throttle body, it definitely is not the best choice available.

.You can't legislate spending limits.  Almost every time it is tried, it turns out badly for the budget limited racer. 

You are right but you can limit which areas money is spent.  The budget limited racer will always suffer but autox at least allows skill to be more of the equation than most automotive endeavors.  I like FI and I agree there is no way to limit it that could be enforced.

>IMO if people don't start getting into P classes (especially CP) at the regional level, even if they are class fillers, they will never get the bug to go divisional or national.  Or, if they do, it will be in another category.  If removing the draconian wheel limits helps this, then it helps the sport.

Here in TX when I started, Janish was the only mainstay in CP.  Over the years, we have seen many people come and go for numerous reasons and not more than a couple of seasons.  At one point, we could field 9-12 cars for a div.  Currently, we might still field up to 9 but they are not coming out for the regional.  Whether it is we have gotten older, slower, broker and many now have families, it is a cycle.  At the regional level, many do not want ot deal with the SCCA politics, little car course designer attitudes or some just don't have reasonable sites.  I just can't see where unlimited wheels is going to increase participation. 

 In closing, I can understand BP and maybe FP's desire for larger wheels but I don't see CP needing it.  This will probably pass due to the SCCA plan of rules by category.  I will await the growth spurt.

Hey Dave- Going to Walnut Ridge?

 

 

---

turbotoddie
todd farris
CP96

 You are correct but the door is open for unlimited spending and the FI system quality goes up with dollars spent. 

I don't agree (IMO).  FI is the same as a carb.  If you are comforatble with a carb, you can get a moldy Holley 750 at the local flea market for $25, rebuild it and add the parts needed and be out the door for a few hundred dollars.  If you are comfortable with FI, you can do a megaquirt with oem sensors and injectors on a home made manifold and be out the door pretty cheap, though it will cost more than the carb. 

Or, in both cases, you can hire an expert and spend a ton of money.

And the difference, IMO, is that the few hundred dollar megaquirt WILL work as well as a Haltech if the builder has the knowledge to make either work.

Not to mention that very few "car people" younger than me (35) have a fricken clue about carbs, or even the desire to learn about them.  In the entire time they have been messing with cars, FI has been the norm. 

Oh well, I know we are not going to change each other's minds on this, and it doesn't matter since the rule is passed, meaning time will tell if either of us is right.

Here in TX when I started, Janish was the only mainstay in CP.  Over the years, we have seen many people come and go for numerous reasons and not more than a couple of seasons.  At one point, we could field 9-12 cars for a div.  Currently, we might still field up to 9 but they are not coming out for the regional.  Whether it is we have gotten older, slower, broker and many now have families, it is a cycle.  At the regional level, many do not want ot deal with the SCCA politics, little car course designer attitudes or some just don't have reasonable sites.  I just can't see where unlimited wheels is going to increase participation. 

I'd like to give you trouble about the world being bigger than TX, but many regions are probably the same.  But, if just one guy from 10% of the regions enters CP at a local event and has enough fun, the hook might get set for them to be the next TurboTodd on the National scene.  If, like Mark Andy, they are scared away by a weight penalty that is irrelevant to thier car (:)) then we'll never know.  I know several people a year ask if thier car is legal in CP at local events.  Before I knew better, I'd say yes but there is a 200# weight penalty for your 17" wheels, or they would find it in the book.  Almost universally, they'd say "No way, that's BS" even though thier street car probably weighed 3600#.  Now, I learned to word my answer differently. :)

We're not going to change each others minds on this either, but it's fun to debate. 

Yes, I will be in Walnut Ridge.

Anyone else reading this, write your letters to seb@scca.com with your opinions on wheel diameters in prepared. 

DaveW 

Another reason to run up to 16" slicks is that Hoosier doesn't make 17" or 18" slicks. The slicks made in those sizes don't suit Autocross. I tested a set of R250 G19 Radial in 18" and Michelin Slicks 18" in the softest compound. We needed 8 runs to start getting grip with the Michelin, at that point they felt phenomenal, but we don't have the chance for 8 consecutive runs at Nationals.

 

---

Rad

2003 Toyota Celica GT-S, 6-speed Manual
2007 BMW 335i Sedan, 6-speed Manual
2007 911 GT3 RS under development
2008 BMW M3, 7-speed DCT