SCCAForums.com

Surferjer:

Dave, you don't really need to go there.  The supercharged Lotuses will reign supreme over the existing SS class. 

 I don't think that will be a worry, though.  I expect the NA Lotus and Z06s to continue their battles for years in a separate class. 

I'm just trying to pull data together for my letter to the SEB.

Dave G.

When members point out that this is the same thing that happened with the Z06, when the old RX7 and C5 owners were upset that the faster C5Z was allowed into the class, I'd like to point out one difference: GM was making 10,000+ Z06s per year for the US market, and made them for 4 years with very few performance upgrades after the 2002 model.  Availablility, then and in the future, was pretty much assured.  With the rate of performance updates that Lotus as a manufacturer makes, even during a model year (2004 LSD for example), the "Loti to have" in SS may require a twice a year purchase as options are added in the model year. 

It's tough to allow a manufacturer like Lotus to be the dominate car in the class because it may cost the membership too much to keep up with the options.  Just look at the Exige.  Introduced in 2007 the base model in no longer manufactured. In 2008 they moved to the Exige S with 19 more HP than the 2007 base.  Now they've added an Exige S-240 with 31 more HP and 40 less pounds than the Exige S, and there's even a Club Sport Exige being introduced half way through the year with who knows what as options and performance. If you bought an Exige in 2007 to compete with you've already be eclipsed 3 times in only 12 months of use. That's tough for the membership to put up with and should be considered when placing an top car into a class. FWIW.

The Elise has the same issues...LSD added late in a year, Track Pack package, introduced the Elise SC and who knows what else is coming from Lotus.

Food for thought. 

---

Ted

2004 Z16/Z06 SS

TedDBere:

It's tough to allow a manufacturer like Lotus to be the dominate car in the class because it may cost the membership too much to keep up with the options.  Just look at the Exige.  Introduced in 2007 the base model in no longer manufactured. In 2008 they moved to the Exige S with 19 more HP than the 2007 base.  Now they've added an Exige S-240 with 31 more HP and 40 less pounds than the Exige S, and there's even a Club Sport Exige being introduced half way through the year with who knows what as options and performance. If you bought an Exige in 2007 to compete with you've already be eclipsed 3 times in only 12 months of use. That's tough for the membership to put up with and should be considered when placing an top car into a class. FWIW.

The Elise has the same issues...LSD added late in a year, Track Pack package, introduced the Elise SC and who knows what else is coming from Lotus.

Food for thought. 

This has been an interesting discussion. Classing decisions being made for limited production cars (or option packages) that will make one limited availability package on a car more dominate. Where have I heard something like this before.......

http://sccaforums.com/forums/1/305157/ShowThread.aspx

Now the "dead horse" is on the other foot....

I agree that the SS limited option car problem needs to be addressed. Maybe car option packages should be required to sell at a set minimum level to be included in stock class. Should stock cars be as delivered from the factory and delivered to dealer, and port optioned card be excluded from stock? Should a car option package that was "available per the manufacturer" BUT NEVER BUILT at factory or port or even delivered to a dealer be allowed in stock class? My letter has been sent. 

 

 

 

TedDBere:

When members point out that this is the same thing that happened with the Z06, when the old RX7 and C5 owners were upset that the faster C5Z was allowed into the class, I'd like to point out one difference: GM was making 10,000+ Z06s per year for the US market, and made them for 4 years with very few performance upgrades after the 2002 model.  Availablility, then and in the future, was pretty much assured.  With the rate of performance updates that Lotus as a manufacturer makes, even during a model year (2004 LSD for example), the "Loti to have" in SS may require a twice a year purchase as options are added in the model year. 

It's tough to allow a manufacturer like Lotus to be the dominate car in the class because it may cost the membership too much to keep up with the options.  Just look at the Exige.  Introduced in 2007 the base model in no longer manufactured. In 2008 they moved to the Exige S with 19 more HP than the 2007 base.  Now they've added an Exige S-240 with 31 more HP and 40 less pounds than the Exige S, and there's even a Club Sport Exige being introduced half way through the year with who knows what as options and performance. If you bought an Exige in 2007 to compete with you've already be eclipsed 3 times in only 12 months of use. That's tough for the membership to put up with and should be considered when placing an top car into a class. FWIW.

The Elise has the same issues...LSD added late in a year, Track Pack package, introduced the Elise SC and who knows what else is coming from Lotus.

Food for thought. 

Scott, those are really good points, your best of the thread IMO.  I will not buy a faster Lotus for racing, because I cannot afford annual trade-ins.   I also have no dog in this fight.  Well, unless I throw shocks and a bar back on my Elise and decide to campaign it again. 

However, aren't other faster cars coimng in from ASP too? 

---

Jer
1993 MR2 #196 ES
2005 Lotus Elise (retired)
1999 Dodge 4X4 tow vehicle
1993 Miata (just tired)
1987 Corolla Lemons car
1984 Citation Lemons car

I am of the mind that it would be crazy to change the current SS. Wern't there like 70 cars in the class at nationals last year, and didn't the Corvette, Elise and GT3 all win nationals over the past three years? Why would we want to change this?  

Now if the intent is to create a new Super Duper Stock (SDS) class with the Elise SC, 997 GT3, GT2, F430 and Viper than that is something I could support.

Chris Cox

I agree Chris, the current participation levels and diversity of Super Stock (and A Stock as well) are great.  The SEB would be shooting itself in the foot if it were to throw all that out, without having some confidence that they have something to replace it that would be even more popular.  They did pull it off when the C5 Z06 was added to Super Stock.  However, I'm just not sure that's going to happen in this economy with the price differentials involved.  The current popularity of SS and AS is because you can go really fast for not a huge amount of money.  A used Z06 I guess is $25-30k, and a used S2000 is $15-20k.  All the same, there are cars on the market that fit the stock category guidelines, but are potentially disruptive to one class or the other.  If they're too fast for A Stock, the SEB can bump them up to SS where they get ignored because they're perceived as hopeless (and they may be).  If they are too fast for Super Stock, all the SEB can do is exclude them.  But in each case, what if there are a bunch of people who really would like to compete in those cars?  If a class can be freed up by combining classes that have become very similar, then that would allow Super Duper Stock, or A-Plus Stock, to be created.  It would really help them to know how many people are interested in running, or would certainly run, in each of those classes.  So if you are interested, let them know.  Don't  sit curled up in a ball wailing that you won't write to them because the SEB doesn't care what you think.  That's a self-fulfilling claim.  If they don't know what you think, they can't care.

---

John S.
S2000 #42as

Let me frame some thinking

In 2010 the C5Z06 will have been out of production for 6 years

In 2010 the NA Elise will have been in SS for 5 years

In 2010  the 996 GT3 will have been out of production for 6 years

Does it make sense in 2008 to start talking about cars that membership can afford (look at the list we published there were no Uber cars on it.) that would outclass the current crop of cars in our most popular class?

bconners:

Let me frame some the thinking

In 2010 the C5Z06 will have been out of production for 6 years

In 2010 the NA Elise will have been in SS for 5 years

In 2010  the 996 GT3 will have been out of production for 6 years

Does it make sense in 2008 to start talking about cars that membership can afford (look at the list we published there were no Uber cars on it.) that would outclass the current crop of cars in our most popular class?

It makes sense to start talking about it.

Does it make sense to act for 2009?  If SS were a stagnant class, then maybe.  But it seems that SS is attracting new blood and the existing drivers are getting faster.  Not sure it's wise to disrupt it yet.

I don't see the harm in getting people thinking about it now so that action can be taken in 2010 (rather, prior to the 2010 season)

 

 

---

John Vitamvas
'04 Z06
'00 Boxster S (For Sale)

I haven't been in this game long but what I can say I have seen is that the SCCA wants new cars to be what is raced in stock classes, period. Auto manufactuers want us as racers to buy new cars, not used cars we can afford and they obviously "lobby" the SCCA to get good placement. BMW, Subaru, Honda, Mazda and last year Ford to name a few.

IF we took that out of the equation and ran the Sports Car "CLUB" of America the way the members wanted it might be a whole new deal.

Why doesn't the SEB ask us questions like:

"How often do you want to buy a new car?"

"Do you like to have just paid off a car and have it become uncompetitive?"

Do you want to wait around to figure out what car you are going to buy next when the SEB makes up their mind AND then expect to sell it in a 1-2 year period when it is outclassed?"

That is honestly the deal here..... we already have classes that are SPEC classes, i.e. BS, GS, and formerly had them in CS with the Miata's.

Isin't the class UNDER SS called AS, and a class over SS called ASP????? 

 

IF THIS RESTRUTURING IS NEEDED: (but does anyone else think it's not needed)

This restructuring should start at the top....

SS = Any 2000lbs Lotus, C6 ZO6, 911 98+ (any), Viper

AS = C6, C5 (ZO6), C4, AP2 S2000, Solstice GXP, Boxter S, Cayman S, 911 97 and earlier, etc

BS = RX-8, 350Z, AP1 S2000, Boxster, Cayman, M Coupe/Roadster up to 06,  etc

CS = Solstice, MX-5, ITR, Mini Cooper S Turbo

DS = AWD Class, Audi, Subaru, Mitsubishi, R32

ES = Same, small old 2 seat low powered sports cars

FS = Same, V8 RWD 3500lbs cars

GS = SEDANS Anything that's not a HS car!

HS = Same Deal

OR WE CAN KEEP IT SIMPLE!!!!!

New Loti = ASP

Cooper S moves to D-Stock

---

Bret
Camaro SS FS

Ok, so the C6Z06 goes in SS even though it's been proven to be at most an equal competitor to the C5Z06.

The C5Z06 gets a spec class in AS.  You take what is the most popular national class this year (look at the Tours and Pros) and decimate it with a class killer.

The AP1 S2K ends up in BS while the AP2, which many people think is slower than the AP1, ends up in AS.

The Cooper S, which has tons of factory support, gets thrown to the wolves in CS.

DS is a spec STi class that no one will drive in.  You guys with the WRXs and R32s are getting stuffed into a class with a 2-second faster car because you have too many drive wheels for the rest of us.

The nebulous line between GS and HS is still nebulous.

---

Dave Heinig

07 GXP Z0K (Thanks Rob!)

SStrokerAce:

I haven't been in this game long but what I can say I have seen is that the SCCA wants new cars to be what is raced in stock classes, period. Auto manufactuers want us as racers to buy new cars, not used cars we can afford and they obviously "lobby" the SCCA to get good placement. BMW, Subaru, Honda, Mazda and last year Ford to name a few.

Are you serious? I don't even know where to start, besides by putting on my tinfoil hat and looking outside for black helicopters. 

ES and DS are two classes with cars that aren't even close to new dominating.  Are they the best-subscribed classes?  I'm not saying DS or ES are flawed, I'm just pointing out that two classes with out-of-production cars that are available for < $15k used are LESS POPULAR than two classes that have contending or top-tier cars that cost more than $25k.

F Stock, to me, is a form factor and not a speed.  The Shelby looks like a duck and quacks like a duck so I think it's a duck. 

Why on earth would you revise SS and AS in that manner?  You just introduced two cars which would be class killers.  Why bother including the S2k, GXP, BoxSter et al in the class if the C5 Z06 and C6 (Z51) are in there?  Might as well put those cars in SS at that point.  Nevermind that the C6 Z06 STILL hasn't shown to be faster than the C5 Z06.  AS becomes spec Z06, BS becomes spec S2000 (like it was before they moved up to AS).  And the M Coupe (Z4 based) didn't start production until 2007.  Did you mean M Coupe (Z3, up to 2002) or M Coupe (Z4, 2007+)?

---

John Vitamvas
'04 Z06
'00 Boxster S (For Sale)

Lobbying doesn't happen.

We don't class based on contingency -  Its never discussed

Your attempt at classing shows how hard this really is. (nice try)

147 people in two stock classes at Nationals gets attention.  

 

No, but people pick cars based on contingency, which then affects participation numbers which affects classing decisions.

---

Dave Heinig

07 GXP Z0K (Thanks Rob!)

John V:

It makes sense to start talking about it.

Does it make sense to act for 2009?  If SS were a stagnant class, then maybe.  But it seems that SS is attracting new blood and the existing drivers are getting faster.  Not sure it's wise to disrupt it yet.

I don't see the harm in getting people thinking about it now so that action can be taken in 2010 (rather, prior to the 2010 season)

 

Your application for the SAC is on its way.

Although its not written as an option.  Do nothing is an option.

DaveH:

No, but people pick cars based on contingency, which then affects participation numbers which affects classing decisions.

 

It really doesn't;  We class it based on the information we have.  If contingency makes it better then its a win win.   

Their are not that many Elise SC's out there, and very----very few with LSD.

Stick supercharged Elise's in ASP-----(also Exige S)

---

Trying to get faster

Just a reminder as to what a healthy SS looks like:

---

Ted

2004 Z16/Z06 SS

What does everyone think of the 996 TT coming to SS?  The X50 package had a bit more oomph and could be had with ceramic brakes.  Too heavy to be a contender?

 What about the GTR?  I would guess Hoosier'll have some 20" R-tires late next year or by 2010 for the ZR1 and GTR.

---

--Jason Rhoades

Surferjer:

 I don't think that will be a worry, though.  I expect the NA Lotus and Z06s to continue their battles for years in a separate class. 

I've been thinking about this, that doesn't make sense from what has been said and the June Fastrack.

1. The June July Fastrack only moves the SC Lotus in to SS.  The current SS cars remain in SS.

2. The June July Fastrack was the cutoff for '09.

3. The July August changes will be for '10.

Therefore, if the SC Lotus is put in SS for '09 per the June July Fastrack, the current SS cars will be bumped in '09.  

It also does not make sense that the Lotus would later be moved back out of SS.  Partly because this is not something that typically is done, but also SS will be dead by 2010 so there will be no point in making the move then.  Unless of course the SEB specifically states the Lotus would be moved back out in 2010, but then why was it put in SS for '09 in the first place?

Just no logic in any of this IMO.

Dave G.

talon95:

Surferjer:

 I don't think that will be a worry, though.  I expect the NA Lotus and Z06s to continue their battles for years in a separate