BIG Stock class change proposal

In reply to Ranger50:

The point I was trying to make was that the person who can prepare a car to the full extent of the rule book will have an advantage over those who can't or won't spend the dollars. Yes, there are cheap and/or DIY things which one can do, but the guy who can get the best suspensions and has a large tire budget will have an advantage.

Moparman wrote: In reply to Ranger50: The point I was trying to make was that the person who can prepare a car to the full extent of the rule book will have an advantage over those who can't or won't spend the dollars. Yes, there are cheap and/or DIY things which one can do, but the guy who can get the best suspensions and has a large tire budget will have an advantage.

Yeah, all you can do is reduce the gains available per dollar. It's like with a Spec Miata engine where you're not allowed to machine the rods to balance them, but you are allowed to buy 50 rods from Mazda, weigh them all, and pick the four that are closest to each other...

Let me chime in as somebody who went to their first autocross a month ago.

I got put into the C-stock class, even though I was running on hard all-season tires. Why? When they asked me what I had done to my car, I said "nothing". If I had run in STX, I would've placed higher in the results, due to the PAX differences. I think it is insane that it was assumed I'd be on R-Comps. However, I quickly realized that "stock" has nothing to do with, you know, being stock. I'm going to run my "stock" car in STX from now on, so I'll probably wind up prepping to that class eventually.

As for tire size, I went out and looked at tires in my "stock" rim size, which is 18". Spendy. Drop to a 17" size, and prices go down quite a bit. This interests me. Since tire choice is strongly dictated by wheel size, I think that any wheel diameter that can fit on a car without rolling the fenders or changing the suspension should be allowed. Changing the width is a bit different. I also think that cars with staggered rims should be allowed to run un-staggered rims if the driver so chooses.

Toyman01 wrote: There are three E-Mod cars in my region and a D-Mod. We are all within a couple of seconds of each other. Last event 1st and 2nd were .007 seconds apart. That's fun racing, in a car that Curmudgeon built for the 2006 Challenge. I've got less in my entire car than a lot of the "stock" guys have in their shocks. Hell, I've got less in my rig, truck and trailer included, than they have in their cars. So for me, it's cheaper. I don't worry about the National scene because I will never be an National caliber driver, I don't take it serious enough.

The same apples and oranges argument applies when comparing a totally stock car with some R-compounds slapped on to fully prepped E-Mod cars...All it really needs to be nationally competitive is better shocks and sway bars. Until then it's totally competitive against all the other vastly underprepared locals in the same class for FAR less than the cost of preparing and campaigning a national caliber E-Mod car, while also still being highly streetable enabling frequent practical use as well.

I can tell you that, from what I know of the guys at the top of Mod class, they do not just stop developing (read: spending money on) their car once they get it to that point of competitiveness either. They're always looking at some new way to make the car just a hair faster and push the envelope just that much further, even though they've far surpassed the point of diminishing returns.

In reply to Driven5:

That's true and is why I said the higher you go the more it costs. It's up to the individual to decide 'enough is enough'. It's also up to the individual to decide which direction to go. Speaking for me, I don't want to daily drive my race car, competitive Stock class cars change yearly, Street Prepared can easily turn a car into something which will pound your kidneys into mush if driven on a daily basis.

The point is, Mod is quite a bit quicker than Stock and if you start with a cheap enough platform (my current car was GIVEN to me) it's possible to develop a very quick Modified class car for a good bit less than a fast Stock class car. I know of a VERY quick regionally competitive Mod class car which was developed from a 4 door Protege.

What's a decent Z06 go for? $30k? An Elise? ~$20k for a salvage title car? I could take that same average of ~$25k, put it in my E Mod car and (with a better driver than me ) at least get close to Keisel at Nationals. And best of all, keep running the same car competitively on a regional level for years.

If I bought a Z06 to go A Stock, then within the parameters of the existing rules holy schitt I'd have half what my house cost into trying to make it Nationally competitive. Think of it: there's the car itself, then a set of Pfadt or Moton shocks, a dedicated set of race wheels/tires, wow. Adds up in a hurry.

My E Mod car: I can buy 13" bias ply slicks for $98 each. 13x9 Bassett wheels are $69 each. I can rebuild a 13B for around $2k if I have to buy rotor housings and if I don't do anything real stupid run that motor for 5 or 6 years. If I break it, I don't have to worry about bumming rides to work.

While that may be true, none of the guys who run Nationally competitive Stock cars in my region use them as daily drivers. And as I've mentioned before, some are trailered to events. Saves on the hassle of swapping tires and from what I understand the alignment is set so as to make the cars chew up tires if street driven... To them, its just an autocross car that happens to be prepped for Stock class. It doesn't get driven much otherwise.

Curmudgeon said: It's up to the individual to decide 'enough is enough'. It's also up to the individual to decide which direction to go.

You could have stopped right there................

A buddy and I are planning to run a 2013 WRX Wagon in RTA this year. We have budgeted for a build basically Identical to the build that won RTA last year and is basically the same as what the DS national champion had. Obviously other than buying the Car which is and will be my Daily Driver the entire "nationals" prep is going to cost about $2.5K tires included. You may say this is rare because the 2011+ WRX is competitive out of the box but we have a local guy that got 2nd in STF last year on a build that includes fixed camber plates, Koni Yellows and the sin of all sins Cut OEM springs. ES is a fairly affordable class to run as well.

nocones wrote: ES is a fairly affordable class to run as well.

Kinda. If you can find the unicorn Miata.

fast_eddie_72 wrote:

nocones wrote: ES is a fairly affordable class to run as well.

Kinda. If you can find the unicorn Miata.

Its not that hard to find, and if you can't, you can find a base and convert it. People make it seem impossible to do, but it really only takes about 2 hours on the internet and $500.

oldsaw wrote:

Curmudgeon said: It's up to the individual to decide 'enough is enough'. It's also up to the individual to decide which direction to go.

You could have stopped right there................

Yeah, but those three Guinness draughts had other ideas...

Ian F wrote: While that may be true, none of the guys who run Nationally competitive Stock cars in my region use them as daily drivers. And as I've mentioned before, some are trailered to events. Saves on the hassle of swapping tires and from what I understand the alignment is set so as to make the cars chew up tires if street driven... To them, its just an autocross car that happens to be prepped for Stock class. It doesn't get driven much otherwise.

Shoot, that's like having a very expensive and slow Mod class car.

Curmudgeon wrote: Shoot, that's like having a very expensive and slow Mod class car.

I don't think it really has anything to do with how fast the car is, but how competitive the car is in a class and the PAX of that class. In one case, the car was chosen because it seemed a easier path towards adding to his Jacket collection (and if you knew some of the other cars he owns, money is not the problem - when he's bored, he brings out his Viper GTS on street tires). In the other case, I'm not sure - he's had it since before I started and it's been for sale for the past ~3 years although he still drags it out a couple of times a year when autocross doesn't conflict with a Lemons race.

What seems to be missed in this discussion is a lot of the guys playing at the pointy end of field aren't there to just "go fast". They are there to win, and not win locally but at Nationals and at Tour events. These are ultra-competitive types and use different criteria for chosing a car that we GRM-types do. The car is merely a tool; a means to an end. Could they spend less on a Mod car that would be faster in raw time? Sure - but how well would that car PAX? How easy/expensive would it be to build a Mod car to be Nationally competitive? While there is definitely friendly smack-talk between the region's top guys at local events, local events are not their focus.

wow, the thread really went on a tanget.

And I'll throw this back out again- remember the GRM car that was not preped for CSP but ended up getting a trophy?

Well, it kind of reminded me of the idea of doing a CSP legal Miata for the Challenge. (not CSP for the drag race, but that's not the point).

Is it possible to put a CSP Miata together for less than $2013 and manage to trophy at the nationals with it? I, personally, think that it is. But don't have the motivation to make it anymore.

To tie back into the original topic: For some people it's about the excitement of competition and the cars (drivers), while for others it's about winning (racers). The great part of this rule proposal is that it allows drivers with significantly more modest budgetary/storage limitations to have their daily driven car or weekend toy to be significantly closer to competitive with racers in national caliber cars (PAX), while also creating better competition at the local level. In the long run this should be VERY good for the entire organization....And In my opinion would be best to see embraced and supported as such by competitors at all levels and in all classes, since it's actually in all of our best interest..

Bumping this back up because the new Fasttrack is out with rules addendums. Looks like they've backed off from the two sway bar idea, which I think is a good thing, and they've limited camber adjustment on strut cars to only one type. You get plates or bolts but not both, you have to pick. There's some other stuff regarding the limited prep prepared class that I need to read to figure out what the hell is going on, but all in all, it looks pretty good and I'd bet we'll see it pass. Time to shop for a rear bar finally.

A rear bar is allowed in Stock now - that change was made recently.

One comment I read that is interesting is with regards to the +/-1" wheel size allowance. While in theory this sound good - and for cars running needlessly large 19" and 20" wheels it probably doesn't matter, but for those still running older carswith 14" wheels it's not much help as it's difficult to find 15" wheels in typically narrow widths.

Right, but the first proposal would have let you change both bars at the same time, not just the 'pick one end' rule that is now in place. I think the pick one end idea is better and I'm glad to see that language back in the rules.
I think the wheel thing is as much about tires as anything else. It increases the chances that a competitive tire can be made to fit on your car and you don't get pushed out of the class because you can't find tires that will fit your stock wheels.

mazdeuce wrote: I think the wheel thing is as much about tires as anything else. It increases the chances that a competitive tire can be made to fit on your car and you don't get pushed out of the class because you can't find tires that will fit your stock wheels.

I agree that's the intent, but for many 14" wheel cars it doesn't help much.

You're right, but what should they do instead? The problem is that r-comps are available in those sizes but street tires aren't? I can see where that would suck.

Ian F wrote:

mazdeuce wrote: I think the wheel thing is as much about tires as anything else. It increases the chances that a competitive tire can be made to fit on your car and you don't get pushed out of the class because you can't find tires that will fit your stock wheels.

I agree that's the intent, but for many 14" wheel cars it doesn't help much.

It sure does help Miata's and E30's, which are 2 vehicles with large followings in this culture.

The +/- 1 would help Civics too I would think.

I wish they would have kept the 2-swaybar allowance. For many serious competitors, I can see them buying both a front & rear bar, then testing them independently to find the fastest setup.

mazdeuce wrote: You're right, but what should they do instead? The problem is that r-comps are available in those sizes but street tires aren't? I can see where that would suck.

It sucks for those who compete with cars originally equipped with 14" and 15" wheels/tires. Unfortunately, for those people, they represent a constantly decreasing slice of those who compete in Stock classes. As manufacturers introduce new, more capable cars they also increase wheel diameters, too.

This presents a big problem for tire manufacturers as they look at markets and see less and less return for high-performance street tires in smaller sizes. That's not a real problem for companies that have carved a niche with r-comps. For now, there are enough people who buy them for higher-prep autocross classes and for road-race style events.

It seems (to me, anyway) that the proposed rule changes are aimed to attract and keep new competitors who show up with newer cars. Yeah, it sucks for those who want to run older cars in Stock but wasn't that the logic for proposing the addition of limited-prep classes for stock cars using r-comps?

While the spirit and competitive nature of GRMr's is admirable, there are realities that must be faced for the people charged with making a lot of people (with agendas) content and attracting new competitors, too.

mazdeuce wrote: You're right, but what should they do instead? The problem is that r-comps are available in those sizes but street tires aren't? I can see where that would suck.

IMHO, a simple line would work: "Cars with OE 14" wheels may use more commonly available 15" x 7" wheels within +/- 1/4" offset restrictions."

Cars with 13" wheels are screwed no matter what as even 14" wheel and tire options are limited.

All that said, I generally agree - the Street rules aren't and shouldn't be oriented towards older cars. Granted, some of this would become moot if they moved the 30 year eligibility rule up a decade or so.