I've been thinking about this for some time but don't really know how/what to do with it all. Maybe just leave it all alone.

We all know there are tons of cars to have to class and that there are already many classes.
For many of the classes 2-4 cars are the winning cars. If you have any other car but those you're there for fun or you're just "getting experiance".

So I was thinking if there was a way to make it so that more cars are able to compete for the title in each individual class. Any ideas?
I was thinking a weight penalty for the first and second place cars or a time penalty? Is that a crazy idea? It's done in road racing why not autocross?

 

Locally, the regions can kind of make up those rules if they like, I think. Nationally, it won't work. Too many good drivers and fast cars. The "problem" is that locally you can have a few national drivers with plenty of experience and talent to make it impossible for you to win. The best solutions are to:

A) Simply drive better

B) Set your car up to the extremes of the rules AND driver better.

C) Buy a differnt car for a less populated class in your region so you don't have to DRIVE BETTER

D) Go to another region where you don't have to DRIVE BETTER.




BTW, just take some friends and hash it out for raw times so you can claim bragging rights. More fun that way......Either way, it's still fun

 

The Chicago Region runs a street tire class, that way the people who show up with r-comps are not put against you.

 

Weights only work with fully prepared cars.

Are you going to tell the 1st timer in a Corvette with only a short shifter that he has to bolt 200 lbs somewhere in the car in order to run in ASP?

 

Well I agree but the point is the cars not the drivers. Obviously the penalty is not to be enforced on the driver but on the car. I'm not saying a weight penalty would work but there must be a way for the rest of the cars in a given class to be competitive. Or you're stuck having to buy 3-4 different cars just so you can win.
A good example is STS. The Civic will forever be the car to win with. So if you don't have one, you wont win. Am I the only one that sees that STS is a one car class? Does no one care? Other classes are very similar.
I'm asking for ideas not telling what would work....

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by dvp &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Well I agree but the point is the cars not the drivers. Obviously the penalty is not to be enforced on the driver but on the car. </TD></TR></TABLE>

That's exactly what I'm saying... the penalty is on the car, so it's just as unfair to the first-timers as "having the wrong car".

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
I'm not saying a weight penalty would work but there must be a way for the rest of the cars in a given class to be competitive. Or you're stuck having to buy 3-4 different cars just so you can win.
A good example is STS. The Civic will forever be the car to win with. So if you don't have one, you wont win. Am I the only one that sees that STS is a one car class? Does no one care? Other classes are very similar.
I'm asking for ideas not telling what would work....</TD></TR></TABLE>

I would disagree that the Civic is the only one that can win in STS. But, as to caring... I base my car buying decisions on their autox potential. If you want to compete nationally, then this is simply how you win. I'm not going to show up to a Grand-Am race with a stock Cavalier and expect the rulemakers to bend the rules so I can win.

If you compete at anything below National events, then almost anything can win any class it's fully prepped for.

Fully prep what you have for regional or divisional events, or buy the car that will win you a National jacket.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by dvp &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Well I agree but the point is the cars not the drivers. Obviously the penalty is not to be enforced on the driver but on the car. </TD></TR></TABLE>

Your method would penalize someone who drives an underprepared, or under-competitive car, but is sucessful because they drive better.

With that scenario, you ARE penalizing the driver.

 

I'm glad bad things can be found for the one idea...any other ways to make the classing "better"? I did ask for other ideas.

I guess I'm a bit shocked that anyone would think the classing is fine and would be willing to go buy the car that is the winner just so they too can win.
What about a max tire width for the 2 top cars? I don't know but they use penalties in road racing, why don't we? Wether it be weight or anything?


Who said anything about "bending" rules? It would be making rules so more cars can compete seriously.
What other car can challenge the Civic in STS?

 

I guess I'm a bit shocked that 60+ cars in 40+ classes isn't enough to pick from...

Want to see a wide-open class? H-stock.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by dvp &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
A good example is STS. The Civic will forever be the car to win with. </TD></TR></TABLE>

A 240SX won a deep STS class at the Fontana Pro Solo.

BTW, is your name Laurence? Are you from Alabama?

Pat

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by slowSER &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">A 240SX won a deep STS class at the Fontana Pro Solo.

BTW, is your name Laurence? Are you from Alabama?

Pat</TD></TR></TABLE>

And a Couger won at last years National tour in DSP. But not one real DSP prepared car was there. It's what happens at the Nationals that really counts and rules should be made based on the Nationals only. The best drivers and the best prepared cars.

So any ideas or is every one ok with having to buy a different car to compete for real?

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by maxQ &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I guess I'm a bit shocked that 60+ cars in 40+ classes isn't enough to pick from...

Want to see a wide-open class? H-stock. </TD></TR></TABLE>

I didn't say add more classes....or cars...

Changing the rules so more cars are available to compete for the top spots in each class.
So we have one open class....

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by dvp &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"> So any ideas or is every one ok with having to buy a different car to compete for real?</TD></TR></TABLE>

Are you competing on the National level?

 

No matter what you do there will always be a "best choice" for ANY class. Just because you see a lot of one particular car it doesn't mean the others don't stand a chance. Some cars are going to take more work to be 'competitive' than others but I certainly wouldn't rule them out. No matter what car you have, you still have to out drive the competition.

 

I agree to a point. Many cars straight up do not stand a chance in the class they are in, even good performance cars. I'll take DSP the class you and I are in. And I have an Integra as well. The winning car last year ran a 285 30 18 tire. If we were to fit that tire on our cars...it wouldn't accelerate...lol. Put that tire on a 325I with almost twice as much torque and almost the same gearing as it's stock size tire would give it and you have a great car. The Integra's stock tire is 23.3". The 285 30 18 is 24.6" tall. Screwing the gearing and adding more unsprung weight than the car can spin easily. Yet the Integra is still in DSP with the 325I. The 325I also tunes WAY better than the Integra does. More power.
I just don't think all this is thought out as well as it could be. Or maybe I care too much?


No I have not competed at the Nationals yet. I would love to, even with the Integra!

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by dvp &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

And a Couger won at last years National tour in DSP. But not one real DSP prepared car was there. </TD></TR></TABLE>

If you look at the results from that Pro Solo, there were *real* STS cars there. Go here and click on "Event results." Or are Paul Bonaccorsi, Kevin McCormick, Bret Norgaard, etc, ham-fists driving under-prepared cars?

Pat

 

http://www.scca.com/News/News.asp?Ref=249

McCormick came in second behind Motonishi both with Civic si's. 2005...

 

I like the solo2 rules pretty much the way they are.

I would like to see a model age restriction in the ST classes sort of like you have in showroom stock racing. Relegate the old ST cars like the civic and crx into an SP class.

The ST classes are supposed to be the "Get the tuner market involved" classes. I think they should showcase modern cars. The only rule change I think you'd need to make would be "ST cars must be equipped with both driver and passenger airbags from the factory although they may be deactivated for competition."

The civics that are winning STS are not modern cars. No airbags, no modern safety features, all those things that the DOT imposes on new cars that makes them heavier and thus slower. The trends in the low displacement market are, unfortunately, more displacement, heavier cars, wider tires, more safety, more amenaties, meaning that no one will ever build annother car like the old civics.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by dvp &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"> I'll take DSP the class you and I are in.</TD></TR></TABLE>

I suspected you were driving an under dog car

DSP is a perfect example to look at. The X19 used to be the top dog in DSP but then someone broke the mold and said "hey, I bet I can make a 325 competitive". Flash forward a few years and now the class is full of them.

Just because a car is the most popular choice doesn't always make it the most competitive choice.

 

But I'm not trying to turn this into a "how can I be more competitive" thread. I refuse to buy another car just to be truely competitive.

And I agree that the most popular car is not always THE car that will always be the king. But I still don't see many of the cars in DSP (or other classes) even having a chance at the 325I or their respective 3-4 killer winners.

Maybe it is also that many of those cars have not been tested at full prep with a great driver....but then why are they classed the way they are? It still feels like guess work to me.

 

OK, lets put your plan in place.

Year 1 All the top drivers drive car X.
Year 2 SCCA adds ???lbs to car X, so it is now even with others.
--So all the top drivers switch to car Y and win by a large margin
Year 3 SCCA adds ???lbs to car Y, so it is now even with others.
--So all the top drivers switch to car Z and win by a large margin
Year 4 SCCA adds ???lbs to car Z, so it is now even with others.
--So all the top drivers switch to car A and win by a large margin
Year 5 SCCA adds ???lbs to car A, so it is now even with others.
--So all the top drivers switch to car B and win by a large margin
Year 6 SCCA adds ???lbs to car B, so it is now even with others.
<U>SCCA also notices that car X has been completely uncompetitve for the past 5-years, so they remove the ???lb penalty.</U>
--So all the top drivers switch back to car X and win by a large margin

Then repeat

The problem is that the top drivers are so good, that whatever car they drive will "look like" it has an advantage. But in stock the advantage is at least 95% driver.

So no matter what weight is added to what car, there will always be an opinionated "best car" for the class. And the best drivers will always pick the best car. And these drivers will still win.

In conclusion After your plan is enacted, the exact same peopele still win every year. So what was the point of the plan again?

I would also note that course design and weather have a huge effect on "the car to have". So will we have rules that say, "if raining AWD cars must add XXXlbs?"





Modified by drkarrow at 2:49 PM 5/2/2006

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by dvp &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"> It still feels like guess work to me. </TD></TR></TABLE>

It is. Until a car is prepared to the full extent of the rules it's all just guessing.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by drkarrow &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">OK, lets put your plan in place.

Year 1 All the top drivers drive car X.
Year 2 SCCA adds ???lbs to car X, so it is now even with others.
--So all the top drivers switch to car Y and win by a large margin
Year 3 SCCA adds ???lbs to car Y, so it is now even with others.
--So all the top drivers switch to car Z and win by a large margin
Year 4 SCCA adds ???lbs to car Z, so it is now even with others.
--So all the top drivers switch to car A and win by a large margin
Year 5 SCCA adds ???lbs to car A, so it is now even with others.
--So all the top drivers switch to car B and win by a large margin
Year 6 SCCA adds ???lbs to car B, so it is now even with others.
<U>SCCA also notices that car X has been completely uncompetitve for the past 5-years, so they remove the ???lb penalty.</U>
--So all the top drivers switch back to car X and win by a large margin

Then repeat

The problem is that the top drivers are so good, that whatever car they drive will "look like" it has an advantage. But in stock the advantage is at least 95% driver.

So no matter what weight is added to what car, there will always be an opinionated "best car" for the class. And the best drivers will always pick the best car. And these drivers will still win.

In conclusion After your plan is enacted, the exact same peopele still win every year. So what was the point of the plan again?

I would also note that course design and weather have a huge effect on "the car to have". So will we have rules that say, "if raining AWD cars must add XXXlbs?"

Modified by drkarrow at 2:49 PM 5/2/2006</TD></TR></TABLE>

Try reading along would you...I already said it was just an idea not the solution. Pretty easy to knock ideas when you don't have any to begin with huh! It was just a simple idea not a master plan and I have already been torn a new hole for it.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by RineRacing &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">It is. Until a car is prepared to the full extent of the rules it's all just guessing.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Well then that pretty much seals it. There is no reason to change a whole lot is there!

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by slowSER &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">A 240SX won a deep STS class at the Fontana Pro Solo.

BTW, is your name Laurence? Are you from Alabama?

Pat</TD></TR></TABLE>

AAcCCCKKK NOOOOOOOOOOO!!!


<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by sdcivic549 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
I would like to see a model age restriction in the ST classes sort of like you have in showroom stock racing. Relegate the old ST cars like the civic and crx into an SP class.

The ST classes are supposed to be the "Get the tuner market involved" classes. I think they should showcase modern cars. The only rule change I think you'd need to make would be "ST cars must be equipped with both driver and passenger airbags from the factory although they may be deactivated for competition."

The civics that are winning STS are not modern cars. No airbags, no modern safety features, all those things that the DOT imposes on new cars that makes them heavier and thus slower. The trends in the low displacement market are, unfortunately, more displacement, heavier cars, wider tires, more safety, more amenaties, meaning that no one will ever build annother car like the old civics. </TD></TR></TABLE>

Why? They are THE cheapest cars to get/move into competitively, by moving them to SP*, you kill a healthy class, you raise the cost of entry/eliminate the investment that many have made or are making and change the intent/face of the class. People can build STS Civics for 6-7K, or buy one for 5K, I personally know 3 guys in the last 2 years that have built, or bought a civic.

Using the 240sx from fontana... Jason Rhoades is not a hack. He may have a weird penchant for aero devices, but he also has some interesting DL1 data with direct comparisons between the Civic and the 240, that show the 240 out accelerates, out brakes, and out corners the civic.

It is not the SCCA's duty to obsolete a car becaase its dominant/popular, its someone else's job to figure out how to beat it...

... and the guys/gals behind the wheel of said car.