SCCAForums.com

Wow, if you're right, SS at Nationals next year will have a very quiet grid.   However, I still don't believe it. 

---

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

Surferjer:

Wow, if you're right, SS at Nationals next year will have a very quiet grid.   However, I still don't believe it. 

It's a proposal, just like the ITR to BS and the bulk of the rest of DS to GS. If it goes through, it's for 2009. If it doesn't, the status quo is okay for at least one more year.

I hope you wrote your letter. I'm still trying to figure out how I want to phrase mine.

---

Karen Kraus
2005 SCCA SEDiv FS Champion
2007 SCCA DSL National Champion
2008 SCCA ProSolo L1 Champion

talon95:

Therefore, if the SC Lotus is put in SS for '09 per the June 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.

This is a big concern to me.  If the Elise SC and Exige S are being put into SS to be sure people bring them out and autox them so the SAC can get some "data" on how good they really are (because if left in ASP no one will campaign one) then come 2010 every one with a current SS car will have chosen to go elsewhere and there may not be any SS cars left campaigning in 2010 to move to AS.

---

Ted

2004 Z16/Z06 SS

CamaroFS34:

No, my understanding was the reason to put all these class changes out without putting the 2010 proposal on the table was that the July Fastrack was the latest they could propose all these moves for 2009.

Sorry, I'm off one month.  It is June now, so I was thinking June Fastrack.  I meant July and August in my other post.  July being the one that was just published (which I was calling June in the other post).

Edit: I went back and fixed by mistake.  Thanks.

Dave G.

TedDBere:

This is a big concern to me.  If the Elise SC and Exige S are being put into SS to be sure people bring them out and autox them so the SAC can get some "data" on how good they really are (because if left in ASP no one will campaign one) then come 2010 every one with a current SS car will have chosen to go elsewhere and there may not be any SS cars left campaigning in 2010 to move to AS.

Well, and if there's a threat of the Elise SC being moved again in 2010, how many people are going to buy $60k Loti and prep them?

As I said, this makes no sense at all to me, but we'll see what's in the August Fastrack (Hey Karen, I got it right that time!  ).

Dave G.

this makes no sense at all to me

How about this scenario?  If a car, such as the C6 Z06 (which is past its 12 month reclassing window) where to come on later this summer and dominate Nats thereby raising the SS performance level, the SAC/SEB would then have another car with similar performance that it could add to SS.  Would that make sense?

 

John V:

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+)?

My point was to show WHY NOT TO REVISE WHAT WORKS ALREADY!

What is the point in all of these horsehocky revisions anyways, take the SS class killer Lotus and put it in ASP and call it a day, rather than screw over numerous members.

Why doesn't the SEB worry about classes that have low car counts at National events..... around here BS sucks and if your not in Texas or the NE FS turnout sucks... screwing with classes like AS and SS IS STUPID!

I still think that some companies who support SCCA get good car placement, and others just make killer products. 

Either way I'm glad I'm not on the SEB and having to deal with all the whiners in the club. My problem is WHY EVEN PULL THIS IN THE FIRST PLACE!

---

Bret
Camaro SS FS

The reason is because (as always) newer and faster cars come to market and need to be classed.

To suggest SCCA is doing this (as compared to the SEB members?) because of the suggestion some companies support SCCA is just about 180 degrees of wrong.  Chevrolet (they make the Z-06) has a history of supporting the SCCA.  Lotus (they make that killer SC Elise) does not.

It is not just the Elise SC that is needing to be classed. 

 

---

2006 Noble M400 (E-Mod?)
CHASECAM the global leader in motorsport video acqusition. We innovate, not copy or import. Sponsor for SCCA ProSolo, Runoffs, SPEED World Challenge, SCCAForums. Supplier to MazdaSpeed, V8Supercars, Formula 1 teams, etc.

I won't attempt to deign the grand plan for the next iteration of Stock class, but I have this thought to offer-

If we work on the basis that one more class is being created near the top, I see a lot more reasonable cars to fit in "A Plus" Stock (regular C5, Cayman S, BMW M, RX7 TT, regular 996) than would work in Super-Duper Stock, for some time to come. It'd be really too bad to mess up the current SS for 2009 or 2010.  There are so many super-fun but still reasonably priced cars that can win - the normal 3, maybe now the C6 Z06, and obviously I think an SRT-10 can do it too.  It's an amazing mix that I think would be made better with the addition of the 996TT.  Of those, the only one you can't get for around $50k or less is the GT3, but even they'll be getting closer to that number once more of the 997's hit our shores.  As time passes, their prices will only compress further.

I don't think we should mess with SS until there are 20" R-compounds and a good collection of the "next generation" of today's SS cars - ZR1s, 997 GT3s, SC Loti, '08+ Vipers, GTRs - running around in the membership, such that the current SS can become the new A Stock.  GT2, F430, LF-A, ACR, and the weird super-low-production stuff (Elise is already pushing it) should not be allowed in Stock IMO.

Thanks for reading...

---

--Jason Rhoades

cashmo:

this makes no sense at all to me

How about this scenario?  If a car, such as the C6 Z06 (which is past its 12 month reclassing window) where to come on later this summer and dominate Nats thereby raising the SS performance level, the SAC/SEB would then have another car with similar performance that it could add to SS.  Would that make sense?

Well, since the C6Z hasn't even come close to showing that level of performance, then no, not really.  If, for example, one person showed this dominating performance, would that warrant moving a somewhat limited production car in to the class that is a more obvious overdog?  Would that really help the situation or would it just compound the problem?

Look at C-stock.  Did moving the MS-R in to the class bolster entries so far over last year?  Not that I can tell.  If anything C-stock is down this year over last year.  Same type of scenario.  Trying to bolster entries by moving in a limited production car (or no production in the case of the MS-R) is not going to provide a good solution IMO.  That's just compounding the problem, rather than fixing it.

Dave G.

i think jason has a very valid point. why not give the cars buried in ss a place to play. how many c5, c6, rx7, bmw, porsche cars are out there without a place to play? if i were writing a letter i would definitely bring this up. instead of creating a class where cars are limited production models of already limited production cars, give the everyday production not-quite-a-supercar a place to play. i understand you want these new fancy expensive exciting cars to come out but no one says they can't do it in asp. hopefully ss and as stay as exciting and varied as they are with awesome attendance. it'd be a shame to kill such great classes just for the sake of a couple of cars.

---

Hector San Nicolas

my last name says i'm a saint,
but putting up with lehman will get me sainthood

Why don't we create a win/win here with regard to the SS part of the proposal.

1) Leave SS and AS alone for the next two years.

2) Create two national "demonstration" classes (or whatever they're called) with trophies at Nationals for the next two years.

       a) XS for the Ubber Stock excluded cars.

       b) AS+ for the Tweeners.

Then run the classes and see which class gets the most participation, then decide which class to add for 2010 and beyond.  Everyone is happy as all cars have a place to play, real data is gathered for a good decision, and the current healthy classes aren't upset.

With the price of gas and the current drop in the stock market this proposal may convince some members to attend Nationals where otherwise they may have choosen to skip next year.

 

---

Ted

2004 Z16/Z06 SS

Scott,

 

I agree 100%, do a couple of provisional classes and see how participation is.  Might even bring my wifes M Coupe out for a few events.

 

I also agree that before the Elise S is allowed in SS it needs to be driven by some of the TOP drivers to evaluate performance vs the current crop of SS cars.   I know before the 996 GT3 was allowed in SS several TOP drivers had driven and evaluated its performance.  It looks like they were right as it took 3 years before it won Nationals in the LARGEST class ever.

 

Peter 

---

T3 S2000
Porsche 996GT2 with a few mods. 2009 OLOA project

There seems to be an underlying theme on this stuff every time a proposed change comes along.  A new potential overdog is suggested for a class that is not one of your more common cars and for some reason everyone flips out thinking there is a line of them waiting to turn in their membership applications just as soon as the SCCA puts their car in a class of their liking.  Why does it seem that no one ever asks the question of whether or not there is some sort of marketing plan in place to tell the owners of these cars that there is an effort to include them in stock form?  Instead said owners come along and go to a local event only to find they are classed in a prepared class yet they have done zero preparation.  Some stick with it because they enjoy the driving while others are turned off by the club and go elsewhere. 

 The whole proposal that has been published so far looks like there is a big shake up coming to virtually all classes, since thats what they said.  The group move from DS to GS matched up against the few individual proposed moves makes me think whatever happens to DS they feel any of the individual cars will still be competitive to some degree is the 'new' DS.  Maybe there is some intention of trying to rebuild participation in stock classes so they represent a higher % of the overall turnout?  People keep talking about gas prices, housing, stocks, and so on and how these things are keeping folks from coming out, its just not the case. 
 

---

Rob S.
116 FS 2008 Ford Mustang Bullitt

South Carolina Region

P. Lier:

I agree 100%, do a couple of provisional classes and see how participation is.  Might even bring my wifes M Coupe out for a few events.

I also agree that before the Elise S is allowed in SS it needs to be driven by some of the TOP drivers to evaluate performance vs the current crop of SS cars. 

I know Pat has some data in Adil's ASP Exige S vs. my Z06 with him driving both of them but there are a few caveats.  1. Adil's Exige S is modified with stiffer springs and stuff than stock and as most of us know these cars are pretty good out of the box and changing things can actually make it handle worse.  Lotus is pretty good with their setups.  2. The course was a 60+ second autox on a road course with 3rd gear and we all know that the Z06 will have an advantage on the straights with 3rd gear.  I don't think Adil's car is the S-240, just the S.

I don't remember Pat's times in the Exige S (they were instructor runs) but I believe they were a few tenths better than his FTD in my Z06.  I think he had two runs in the Exige S and 4 in my car.  I'm sure SAC probably has this data.

The Exige S was run in XP at Devens, winning 1st and 2nd in the class.

---

Ted

2004 Z16/Z06 SS

While I do think the Elise SC is going to be faster, it is possible the Elise's weaknesses, like front camber limitation and very sensitive ice mode, might become more of an issue...like you've said, we won't really know until stock prepared cars are put throught their paces by guys/gals with Elise seat time...I'm sure Matthew would volunteer to help out

But, no matter how you look at it, the C5 Z06, the car which represents the bulk of the SS numbers, is going to be between a rock and a hard place...too fast for the tweener class, no doubt, but not fast enough for uber stock...which is a bummer, because the C5 Z is about the best bang for the buck available to the autocrosser who also needs a daily driver.

I also agree that Scott/Ted's post about the possibly very small production numbers is right on point. This would be a very good situation to invoke the spirit of the "1000 car" language...

---

In slow, out fast.
In fast, out backwards.

TedDBere:

1. Adil's Exige S is modified with stiffer springs and stuff than stock and as most of us know these cars are pretty good out of the box and changing things can actually make it handle worse.  Lotus is pretty good with their setups.  2. The course was a 60+ second autox on a road course with 3rd gear and we all know that the Z06 will have an advantage on the straights with 3rd gear.

I'd say those 2 things aren't just caveats...they render the data fairly useless imo...a non-stock car vs. a stock car on a non-standard "autox" course?

---

Bryan
2008 Corvette Z51
SS #TBD

talon95:

Look at C-stock.  Did moving the MS-R in to the class bolster entries so far over last year?  Not that I can tell.  If anything C-stock is down this year over last year.  Same type of scenario.  Trying to bolster entries by moving in a limited production car (or no production in the case of the MS-R) is not going to provide a good solution IMO.  That's just compounding the problem, rather than fixing it.

Dave G.

I will agree with that moving limited production classes into a class doesn't really fix anything but instead screws the class up where people who have been happily running the class stop showing up because they've got a car that they can no longer be competitive in.

In the current economic climate, I think this issue of changing cars because its no longer competitive is a delicate one.
 

TedDBere:

2) Create two national "demonstration" classes (or whatever they're called) with trophies at Nationals for the next two years.

       a) XS for the Ubber Stock excluded cars.

       b) AS+ for the Tweeners.

Uber Stock now that is funny. 

Now that I’m back from vacation I’ll try to clear up some points.  First, it’s not about what the SAC/SEB wants, it’s what the membership wants.  When we get email asking about Super Duper Stock cars we feel obligated to ask the membership what they think about them.  Personally I’ve never paid more than $9k for any of my Stock classed cars.  However, I realize there are club members who do wish to spend 10 times that amount and we have