IT does too!
IT does too!
Honestly, I used to build scale models. You really haven't lived until you've read a 25 page e-fight over the cockpit color of a P-47 Thunderbolt.
oldsaw wrote:
Like, ummm, somebody said:
Duke wrote: Every time I bring this up where there are a bunch of hardcore SCCAers around, I get shouted down by "WELL OBVIOUSLY THE MEMBERS WANT IT THIS WAY OR IT WOULD BE DIFFERENT!"
I'm not riled about it, since I'm not nationals material, but that attitude surely goes a long way to explain our current federal government situation. "Well, it may be stupid, but it's where we are, and somebody is going to piss and moan if we change it." So good money gets thrown after bad. Meh, whatever. I run for myself anyway. I'm just offering an opinion about what could make it easier to engage newcomers and get them drawn in and involved. It just so happened that I stayed involved despite getting slaughtered in my overclassed D Stock (and actually stock) 325i on its ancient RE-01Rs.
The T index is a great idea but the actual index figure is too small IMHO, and it is optional by region. But it is a step in the right direction.
Per Schroeder wrote: Narrow track, tall greenhouse, limited travel in rear suspension = not so much fun. It's the one thing an E30 isn't all that good at--staying on its tires in stock
Well poo. So much for that idea... 
One of the guys on SCCAForums put it well with regards to R-Comps in Stock: If we were writing the rules from scratch, then yes - a TW140 limit on Stock tires makes perfect sense. However, we are NOT starting from scratch, so it isn't that simple.
Cars in Stock are currently classed with the rules and tire allowances in mind. Completely re-writing the Stock rules to eliminate r-comps would require reorganizing the class. To an auto-x noob, this doesn't sound like a big deal, but to guys who have been racing for longer than many of us have been alive and have invested a LOT of money into buying and preparing nationally competitive cars (I've seen a number of "stock" cars that are trailered to events and are only used for auto-x), this would be a big deal.
In reply to Duke:
See IanF's subsequent post........
BTW, I agree (somewhat) with the federal government analogy; big changes start with small ones. But, I don't see SCCA's ruleset as one that affects as many people in important ways.
Go back and read my questions directed to "car39"; the answers may already be available.
My club has a "Stock" class with a 140 TWR rule and a "Sticky Stock" class for slicks.
Almost nobody comes with slicks anymore.
I think that's the other thing. In my area, there are 3 or 4 SCCA Regions within reasonable driving distance that run events regularly, and in that same distance, at least 10-15 other "autocross clubs" that put on events, and most of which don't use the SCCA's class structure. While I support welcoming new folks at SCCA events, there ARE other options out there.
Duke wrote: Don't get me started. Every time I bring this up where there are a bunch of hardcore SCCAers around, I get shouted down by "WELL OBVIOUSLY THE MEMBERS WANT IT THIS WAY OR IT WOULD BE DIFFERENT!" Uh huh, sure, just how often does that work out in *any* bureaucracy?
I'm sure I won't change your opinion, but it is a rule set that is member input driven... the R-comps in Stock class came about because the members wrote to the board often enough that the board put the idea out for consideration of the members and the resounding answer was ... R-COMPS
the changes coming next yr in ST and all the other street touring classes didn't just pop up at a board meeting and get passed 'cause they wanted them... they were in response to member input ... plus of course the desire to find a way to make the civic go away 
ransom wrote: As near as I can think, the only real fallout from discontinuing R-comps in favor of slicks would be the ability to drive to an event on the race tires. Not at all unheard of, but worth it for the complexity of a whole class of 'tweener tire?
I thought the fastest people in ST were buying a second set of wheels, shaving their 140 TW "street tires" down to minimum tread depth, and still changing at the event? I would think there's an advantage to doing so (less tread depth on non-heat-cycled tires), and if that happens then a 140 TW limit in stock doesn't do anything except change the brand of tire that people buy.
A pampered set of 140 UTOQs is still far closer to street rats than a pampered set of R Comps is.
In reply to Duke:
Regarding your earlier analogy to the government and the SCCA, consider the argument between federalists and statists.
The crew in Topeka administers to the "national" competitors who overwhelmingly want r-comps in stock classes; that is why the baseline rules allow them. But, the national office defers to local regions when it comes to deciding on issues important and pertinent to local members. Hence the adoption of street-tires-only classes (or pax indices) at local events.
One ruleset addresses the interests of national-level participants but allows regional/local groups to tailor the rules for their own needs and interests.
What part of this arrangement makes it so abhorrent to those who question the balance of national and local rules? Is any other alternative better?
If so, why?
Did anyone mention the M2 class in SCCA Rallycross? 
SpeedTheory wrote: I think that's the other thing. In my area, there are 3 or 4 SCCA Regions within reasonable driving distance that run events regularly, and in that same distance, at least 10-15 other "autocross clubs" that put on events, and most of which don't use the SCCA's class structure. While I support welcoming new folks at SCCA events, there ARE other options out there.
I can tell you that you are not allowed to use the NASA classes if you're not a NASA sanctioned organization. Been there, tried that, got the "send us money or hear from our lawyers" phone call for our little club that offered autocrossing for one or two dozen people in rural Colorado. I expect it's the same with SCCA. FYI.
oldsaw wrote: What part of this arrangement makes it so abhorrent to those who question the balance of national and local rules? Is any other alternative better?
It's not "abhorrent". It just doesn't really make any sense - seriously, why make stock cars as fast as modified cars by allowing true race rubber, but hobble modified cars by limiting them to street tires? Now, the manufacturers have responded to the situation by making some incredible "street" rubber in the last few years... but that doesn't remove the fundamental disconnect in reasoning that created the situation in the first place.
The Street Tire Index is a compromise, and as such it is better than nothing. But since it is optional, its availability in a given region is hit or miss. And I still think that the index is too small, meaning R-comps are still a necessity if you are chasing pax points.
Keith: my local club uses SCCA classes (and makes no secret of it) but we have not yet gotten a nastygram from Kansas. So either word is not out yet, or they are being generous about it. Both are equally possible.
To the OP, your in Mi, come on over to Detroit and run with DCSCC (Detroit Council of Sports Car Club's) Shhhhh don't tell anyone, but they have sensible rules! Street tire classes for stock, Street prepared and Street mod. In most cases their rules are slightly more lax than the equivalent Surprisingly Cumbersome Club for the Anal-retentive. In stock class for instance you can do several sensible things that people often want to do for HPDE's like run braided brake line, remove (expensive to replace) emission parts on pre 85 vehicles. Run a non standard (no airbag) steering wheel. The events are cheaper than the Silly Car Club of the Anonymous as well ($20-25 Vs $35-40). You can run and work when you want, or you don't have to work if your tight for time and you normally get 5 runs min. You can turn up at 9:00 and be done by 2:00 even if you work, earlier if not. If you work and stay to the end of the day you can normally get free fun runs at least with the Alfa Club. But keep it quiet or the Sanctimonious Car Club of the Afflicted members will get their rule books in a twist. IF you've been silly enough to spring for the overpriced Superstitious Car Club for the Arrogant membership you can run with that, or join one of the other member clubs. No membership of any club? no problem it's just an extra $10 rather than $20 with you know who to cover you for the day.
http://dcscc.blogspot.com/ Rules http://dcscc.org/rulebook/2011%20DCSCC%20Rulebook.pdf
P.S. Please don't anyone take offence of my ribbing of the SCCA, It's a great organization for those who want to run within their rules and event structure. 15 years ago when I was younger and thought that autocross meant something, I was a great fan and ran with them everywhere and didn't understand the less structured approach of DCSCC events. Back then I wasn't married and didn’t' have kids so being at an event site for 10 plus hours for 3 mins run time and having hundreds, make that thousands of $$'s tied up in useless wheels and tires seemed perfectly normal. Now I want to go, have some fun with a couple of buddies, run the event and go home to the family and spend time with them without ever touching a jack, tire wrench etc.
jstein77 wrote: The only drawback with running a Miata in stock class is that you'd have to get a little trailer to carry your race tires on and change them at the event.
No you don't! Back when I ran with that silly rule book club I ran a 91 Miata in B stock, yup, Miata's used to be in B stock coz they were so darn fast! I could fit 4 race wheels/tires in the car along with a trolley jack, toolbox, cooler of food, helmet, clothes for the weekend etc. I ran all the Cen Div and Pro Solo events like that travelling from Detroit as far as Kentucky, Pennsylvania etc. The only time I did it differently was borrowing a tow dolly and towing to Nationals, but that had more to do with wanting to save money on a hotel so I bought an old E150 conversion van for about the same $$'s as a week of hotel bills would have been.
I've wondered about traveling east. Unfortunately, most "Detroit area" events are about 2 1/2 hours from here. The additional travel time kind of negates the benefits for more efficiently run events. You guys usually run at Belle Isle right?
Duke wrote: It makes absolutely no sense to me that "stock" cars are allowed to run race rubber, but certain classes with a higher prep level are not. Let's see - take slow cars and put fast rubber on them, and take fast cars and put slower rubber on them. Yeah, that makes sense. There is no official home for people who don't/can't spend a lot of money. You have to invest it in tires for "Stock" or in mods for ST*... no option to "run what ya brung" and still have a hope of being competitive unless your region happens to have a street tire index. And even in those (Philly has one), the index is *way* smaller than the difference between good street tires and R-comps.
I haven't noticed people in Philly who switched to the street tire index PAXing much differently than they were before. Keep in mind that this is the first year we've run a street tire index, and there is no magical formula to make things balance out. The difficulty lies in the fact that some cars/classes gain/lose more switching between street tires and r-compounds, so it's tough to figure out a blanket adjustment that works for every car/class. It's going to take some tinkering; if you think the street tire index adjustment isn't right, step up and suggest one that you think might work better, and make sure you show your work. ;)
In the end, though, if someone isn't traveling to and competing in national-level events, I don't see why they would care how national events work. Lccal regions are free (and encouraged) to adjust the rules to best serve their members.
The real root of a lot of this argument is that "I" want to win in the car "I" want, prepped the way "I" prefer and for the money "I" want to spend. The sign mentioned earlier says you can "race" your car today, not that you can "win with" your car today. One requires a lot more work, dedication and sacrifice than the other.
Also, I'd point out the the ST prep level is still fairly new; it came along well after other prep levels like Stock, Prepared and Modified existed. ST was essentialyl intended to be a sort of "SP Lite." The previous "prep level progression" was Stock --> P --> M. The fact that ST* was later added in shouldn't change the nature of other classes.
kazoospec wrote: I've wondered about traveling east. Unfortunately, most "Detroit area" events are about 2 1/2 hours from here. The additional travel time kind of negates the benefits for more efficiently run events. You guys usually run at Belle Isle right?
Plus Pole town, Oakland U etc, but good point, still 2.5 hours away
Following up a combination of Adrian and Old Saw's posts.
As Adrian pointed out, we have classes that include BOTH street tire and R compound options. Put a T in front of your class, and walla- the rules have you at 140 or greater rubber.
So, if you go do the council page that Adrian listed, and then look at results, you'll see that given the option, on a local basis, for sure, people overwhelmingly choose the street tire classes over R classes.
2010 was the first year where we did a real SP on street tire class, so a straight up comparison of 3 AROC events last year: Stock, R tires- 17 drivers
Stock, street tires- 64 drivers
SP- R tires- 17 drivers
SP- Street tires- 23 drivers.
Now, that does not include one of the leading classes we've had over the years- which is roughly the equivalent of SM type, but broken up via SP performance and not number of doors (so it made some real sense)- and those classes have been the largest classes for quite a few years now, when on street tires. The R classes of those are normally counted on a single hand.
While I personally LOVE running R tires, and will continue to do so, our audience/customers have spoken. And we have listened.
Oh, and yes, the guys who used to be the fastest are still the fastest.
Duke wrote: It's not "abhorrent". It just doesn't really make any sense - seriously, why make stock cars as fast as modified cars by allowing true race rubber, but hobble modified cars by limiting them to street tires? Now, the manufacturers have responded to the situation by making some incredible "street" rubber in the last few years... but that doesn't remove the fundamental disconnect in reasoning that created the situation in the first place.
There's no "reasoning" in your argument - just ranting. The rules didn't just come about yesterday, they've evolved over decades. What you propose basically tells everyone who has run in Stock at a National level for years to go screw themselves, take the thousands they've spent on their cars and flush it down the toilet. All so a bunch of noobs running ill set-up cars can still get their asses handed to them by some guy in a crap-can who knows how to auto-x and set up a car. Most of them will still get frustrated and never run again. I'm sorry - it just doesn't make sense.
Is the system perfect? No, and I don't think anyone will say it is, but it works and it's been a stable ruleset for quite awhile. Racers like stable rules.
Ian F wrote: There's no "reasoning" in your argument - just ranting. Is the system perfect? No, and I don't think anyone will say it is, but it works and it's been a stable ruleset for quite awhile. Racers like stable rules.
sigh
Like I said with my first post: no one on the SCCA side ever really justifies the tire compound rules or explains the logic of it, they just shout down those who dare question it like we want to kill Santa Claus or something. IT IS BECAUSE IT HAS BEEN DECIDED SO. DO NOT DISSENT. That attitude is one of the main reasons I am not even an SCCA member. If I do ever become one, it will only be to save money on entry fees if/when joining becomes cost-effective.
The local Philly Region are actually a good gang (didn't recall Buzz was one) and when somebody proposed the T index on their forums, discussion followed and the suggestion was adopted. It seems to have been successful judging by the turnout. Also see alfadriver's post above showing similar results - the VOICE OF THE MAJORITY may not be so monolithic as it is assumed to be. I have no problem with the T index and think it's great, though it can somewhat dilute the classing structure. But again, it's optional, and not available in every region. Philly only adopted it this year.
My beef about the index value itself is very minor; I haven't done the statistical analysis, and I am quite possibly talking through my hat there.
Buzz, I usually make Delaware Park and Dover events. I'm often the only car in SSM (#65 Miata) and I'm usually there with my daughter (#16 Impreza wagon in TGS). I'd love to chat during events. I want to make it up to CBP some time but I need to get a trailer organized so I can secure our stuff in the paddock first.
oldsaw wrote:car39 wrote:Pertinent questions to ask: Are the people who used to win on r-comps still winning the class? Not as often. Have the stock classes seen a big increase in the number of entries? Street prepared has been the biggest change, since that's where the stock cars with R comps go. As the R comps wear out, then people are going back to street Did the club see an increase in the number of new members because of the change? No real change Have members stayed around longer because of the change? No real changeKeith wrote:Our club established a 140 treadwear limit for stock classes last year. There was bitchin and moaning like it was tax time, but now it's kind of established, and the people who run stock class enjoy not changing tires all the time.HStockSolo wrote: The SCCA should adopt the ST* treadwear limitation to Stock.Agreed. I really don't understand why "stock" cars run R compounds. But I don't race with the SCCA, so they probably don't really care what I think!
We also have a club within reasonable driving time that still allows R comps in stock. It seems that the same core of people who ran with both clubs, still run with both clubs after the change.
Adrian_Thompson wrote: Now I want to go, have some fun with a couple of buddies, run the event and go home to the family and spend time with them without ever touching a jack, tire wrench etc.
Changing tires at events is a little annoying. Some claim that top SCCA ST* competitors will also trailer cars and/or change tires at events, but that really isn't even true at the national events.
I have only run SCCA events in Detroit, I'll have to look into attending Council events in the future. Detroit is a bit of a drive for those of us in West Michigan. I know some guys who are getting a hotel room for our event(s) this weekend in Lansing.
My wife actually missed that we didn't go to any events further away this year. We've brought our kids and tent to Peru and Oscoda a few times.
Duke wrote: *sigh* Like I said with my first post: no one on the SCCA side ever really justifies the tire compound rules or explains the logic of it, they just shout down those who dare question it like we want to kill Santa Claus or something. IT *IS* BECAUSE IT *HAS BEEN DECIDED SO*. DO NOT DISSENT. That attitude is one of the main reasons I am not even an SCCA member. If I *do* ever become one, it will only be to save money on entry fees if/when joining becomes cost-effective.
I'm apologizing in advance, Duke, but your arguments come across as little more than rants and an aversion to the history of how/why r-comps were allowed for stock classes. In a nutshell, I'm (respectfully) calling BS.
Over 25 years ago the stock-class competitors wanted to use r-comps and lobbied the SCCA to allow them. The club paid attention and eventually changed the rules to accommodate the wishes of its' members. The decision was never taken lightly and received a lot of review before the change was implemented; it followed a process used for literally every change to the "national" ruleset.
Your view obviously differs, but I'm not seeing anyone (on this thread or others) who are SHOUTING you down for your opinions. We are, however, trying to explain why things are the way they are AND we are trying to explain how those who share your agenda can effectively change the rules.
Are the rules perfect? He!! NO.........
Are your opinions valid? YES!
But you complain about how the SCCA administers to its' members and still refuse to join the club. Then, you complain because your local non-SCCA club uses an index that doesn't favor your ability/desire to compete on a higher level.
You're not using an argument that shows the clubs as the source(s) of your frustrations.
You'll need to log in to post.
