Having to set up the scales for regional events will keep the cars at the "as delivered weight from the dealer" is going to be the norm in this brave new world.
Having a way to add camber is going to be the next from the factory, to help save the Hoosiers they run in SS.
jharry3 said:
Come to think of it I haven't seen anyone using a horse for transportation since last year's Houston Rodeo ride. The saddle makers need to stop that internal combustion engine before it takes away from their business.
I wonder what class a Horse and Buggy, would be put in. The buggy and horse would be stock other than polyurethane horseshoes for better grip, and maybe switch the wagon from drums to disc brakes.
In reply to Fueled by Caffeine :
You mean, David Marcus, pro driver at the $2000 Challenge?
Keith Tanner said:I don't think "street EV" makes any sense, because the choice of propulsion is a small aspect of what makes a car good at autox. It makes more sense to keep them mixed together. EVs might punch above their weight (so to speak) but they're not all going to be as fast as an M3P. Show up with an electric Fiat and you'll get your butt handed to you if you're up against nothing but other EVs.W
I'm no autocross lover, but it seems like there are soooo many classes already, what's one more?
My take, which is worth exactly what everyone has paid for it.
The world, including a whole bunch of people on this forum, has been touting how much faster these are compared to simple gas powered vehicles. Better in just about every metric. Why would they not be classed on the top rung.
Maybe the SCCA was actually listening.
Thank you for your input.
Toyman01 said:My take, which is worth exactly what everyone has paid for it.
The world, including a whole bunch of people on this forum, has been touting how much faster these are compared to simple gas powered vehicles. Better in just about every metric. Why would they not be classed on the top rung.
Maybe the SCCA was actually listening.
Thank you for your input.
That's my take as well.
I guess I'll be the voice of reason here and say that while this move is certainly a bummer for Tesla owners, it's also 100% understandable. Teslas are not being "outlawed" by any stretch of the imagination, simply moved to a class where they're not as likely to be overdogs.
Seriously how can you even build a ruleset to accommodate a car that could gain 15% more power from an OTA update on the night before an event? How do you fairly class a car that's constantly changing, and the owners have little to no control over those changes? That would be a tough task for a major professional organization let alone a club. I think the reclassing has less to do with any inherent competitiveness of the Tesla and more to do with the unmanagability of the frequency and magnitude with which the car's performance envelope changes.
Speed wise, it should have gone to A Street but then spec C5Z06 would be randomly disrupted when it rains.
Is anyone actually inconvenienced by it going to SS and competing for a trophy instead of a win? The class change only really affects drivers on the regional circuit. You can still win locally. We had one get FTD against well prepped ST cars recently.
ojannen said:Speed wise, it should have gone to A Street but then spec C5Z06 would be randomly disrupted when it rains.
Is anyone actually inconvenienced by it going to SS and competing for a trophy instead of a win? The class change only really affects drivers on the regional circuit. You can still win locally. We had one get FTD against well prepped ST cars recently.
AS makes sense from a current performance standpoint, but then you potentially upset what is currently the largest class in all of Solo. I think there's a legit case to not do that if you don't have to. I think there's also a case for keeping similar cars together as much as possible. It's not easy to explain to someone who doesn't know much about autocrossing that "this is the class for Corvettes... and this one weird electric car"
In reply to Toyman01 :
Another thing to consider that most people do not is that the car's track mode released 14 months ago with a 3.5 second 0-60.
Post solo nationals, that same car is now running sub 3 seconds to 60 in the dry thanks to OTA updates.
https://electrek.co/2019/11/14/tesla-model-3-performance-0-60-mph-acceleration-dips-below-3-sec-software-update/
Even as the car sits right now, I don't think it's a B Street car anymore. and the SAC and SEB are not going to put it in A Street where it could become a course dependent winner that can destabilize the most popular national street class right now.
JG Pasterjak said:I guess I'll be the voice of reason here and say that while this move is certainly a bummer for Tesla owners, it's also 100% understandable. Teslas are not being "outlawed" by any stretch of the imagination, simply moved to a class where they're not as likely to be overdogs.
Seriously how can you even build a ruleset to accommodate a car that could gain 15% more power from an OTA update on the night before an event? How do you fairly class a car that's constantly changing, and the owners have little to no control over those changes? That would be a tough task for a major professional organization let alone a club. I think the reclassing has less to do with any inherent competitiveness of the Tesla and more to do with the unmanagability of the frequency and magnitude with which the car's performance envelope changes.
thank you for coming in to reiterate this.
JG Pasterjak said:ojannen said:Speed wise, it should have gone to A Street but then spec C5Z06 would be randomly disrupted when it rains.
Is anyone actually inconvenienced by it going to SS and competing for a trophy instead of a win? The class change only really affects drivers on the regional circuit. You can still win locally. We had one get FTD against well prepped ST cars recently.
AS makes sense from a current performance standpoint, but then you potentially upset what is currently the largest class in all of Solo. I think there's a legit case to not do that if you don't have to. I think there's also a case for keeping similar cars together as much as possible. It's not easy to explain to someone who doesn't know much about autocrossing that "this is the class for Corvettes... and this one weird electric car"
I've been so busy writing comments over in book of faces land, you beat me to the punch.
I guess I should also point out for the zillionth time that Solo Street Class rules are inherently volatile and biased toward newer cars and prone to "flavors of the month" because you will never ever ever ever build any sort of parity by applying the same prep allowances to different cars.
This is partly by design—keep freshness in the classes and keep them from stagnating. It's hard to market a program to sponsors where the competitive cars are old and irrelevant anywhere but this one venue. Plus, in a weird sort of way, flavor of the month creates parity by making the competitive cars easily available to every driver. I can walk in to any Mazda dealer in the country and buy an MX-5 that can win a national championship. That's better in a lot of ways than having to find one 25 year old car with an option package that they only made 30 of to be competitive.
Dave M said:Keith Tanner said:I don't think "street EV" makes any sense, because the choice of propulsion is a small aspect of what makes a car good at autox. It makes more sense to keep them mixed together. EVs might punch above their weight (so to speak) but they're not all going to be as fast as an M3P. Show up with an electric Fiat and you'll get your butt handed to you if you're up against nothing but other EVs.W
I'm no autocross lover, but it seems like there are soooo many classes already, what's one more?
It’s got nothing to do with the number of classes. An EV-only playground (like the “metal car” class used by my local Corvette club) is going to be wildly unbalanced. EVs vary as much as ICE cars do. An early Leaf would be as competitive as my classic Mini would in Metal Car, where you can also find purpose-built rotary X1/9 autox weapons. Why would you segregate them just because of how they motervate their wheels?
JG Pasterjak said:That's better in a lot of ways than having to find one 25 year old car with an option package that they only made 30 of to be competitive.
That brings up memories of a certain championship results, where ten out of ten cars in a certain class were 1989 CRX Si. Might have been 1990. Apparently there was a one year only deal where certain option packages could be had with certain option deletes.
jharry3 saidNot to mention Jim Hall's 2D with moveable wing being outlawed and the Chaparral 2J sucker car the same.
I thoroughly dislike people who outlaw innovation that changes the game.
I can not let hyperbole go unchecked the 2D wing was outlawed with all the other movable aerodynamic devices F1 and F2 cars were being built with aerofoils mounted directly to the suspension and failures were causing horrific crashes. The 2D got caught in the movable device ban. The 2J's snowmobile motor and fan were also determined to be movable devices and were therefore subject to the ban.
In reply to Keith Tanner :
If EVs are able to get a big HP boost with an OTA, they're a different ballgame. Also, you could argue that they have superpower traction control compared to ICE cars. I'd suggest multiple EV classes if there is too much variation, but really, who's going to take anything other than a Tesla or Porsche EV to autocross these days with any regularity? I toy with the idea of taking my i3, but then I'd need to get real tires and I get less interested in that idea.
David S. Wallens said:In reply to Fueled by Caffeine :
You mean, David Marcus, pro driver at the $2000 Challenge?
The man myth legend indeed.
Rons said:jharry3 saidNot to mention Jim Hall's 2D with moveable wing being outlawed and the Chaparral 2J sucker car the same.
I thoroughly dislike people who outlaw innovation that changes the game.
I can not let hyperbole go unchecked the 2D wing was outlawed with all the other movable aerodynamic devices F1 and F2 cars were being built with aerofoils mounted directly to the suspension and failures were causing horrific crashes. The 2D got caught in the movable device ban. The 2J's snowmobile motor and fan were also determined to be movable devices and were therefore subject to the ban.
Which is how and why the Brabham BT46 (AKA the Fan car) was legal. The Chappal used snow mobile engines to turn the fan. The Brabham used the fan mainly for cooling. Gordon Murray designed it to be 55% cooling : 45% downforce. As the 'primary' function was cooling it was legal. In fact the FIA measured it as 60% cooling, 40% downforce. Bernie Eccelstone withdrew the car after it's one and only race, and win, to keep FOCA going. The rules were changed at the end of the year, long after it was witdrawn, to prevent other cars from doing the same thing.
Back to the Tesla, it makes me laugh that it was in BS. BAck when I cared about autocross my 90 1.6L Miata was in BS. My how times have changed.
I can't wait to see how the Porsche Taycan does through the cones. A car built by a company that knows and cares about performance as opposed to Tesla's one trick pony.
<points and laughs electrically at Tesla 3 owners>
Dave M said:In reply to Keith Tanner :
If EVs are able to get a big HP boost with an OTA, they're a different ballgame. Also, you could argue that they have superpower traction control compared to ICE cars. I'd suggest multiple EV classes if there is too much variation, but really, who's going to take anything other than a Tesla or Porsche EV to autocross these days with any regularity? I toy with the idea of taking my i3, but then I'd need to get real tires and I get less interested in that idea.
Following that logic - why do we have multiple classes for the ICE cars? Really, who's going to take anything but a Miata or Corvette to autocross? It makes perfect sense for the classes to be based on actual performance, and if that means that a silent four door sedan is competing directly with Honda's supercar, well, that's how it works.
The OTA "problem" is going to apply to every vehicle eventually. You'll be able to rent turbo overboost for the weekend, or the torque vectoring will learn a new trick. Mid-season reclassification may become a thing and hooo boy is that going to be fun to watch.
In reply to Keith Tanner :
I agree OTA updates are not just a problem for electric cars.
And re: electric Porsche - don't be surprised when it sucks (even at autox or track days) compared to the Tesla. Remember that innovators can often copy the old guard, but the old guard struggles to copy the innovator. Example: Apple's iPhone worked well enough as a Nokia but Nokia could never make something that worked well enough as an iPhone. And Kodak. And IBM. And Timex. Etc etc etc.
See also: Nissan leaf vs any Tesla ever.
In reply to David S. Wallens :
I had the same idea to trade in my 2018 Focus ST and buy a Model 3 dual motor performance and be king of the hill with nothing but a tire change. This seems to be very unfair to Tesla owners. There are really no upgrades that can be done to make a Tesla quicker where ICE users have infinite options to improve performance within their class. The future is electric.
bklecka said:In reply to David S. Wallens :
There are really no upgrades that can be done to make a Tesla quicker where ICE users have infinite options to improve performance within their class.
Uhh, not within Street class, which is what we are talking about. The performance improvements are in fact quite finite. Street is the most restrictive class in SCCA autocross. One sway bar can be upgraded, added or removed. Any width tires, but on stock width rims, +/-1", Shocks can be changed out. Drop-in air filter (Tesla's can't do that, but there is very little gain there anyways). Cat-back exhaust (drop some weight and pick up some power cars, but again, very little gain).
bklecka said:In reply to David S. Wallens :
I had the same idea to trade in my 2018 Focus ST and buy a Model 3 dual motor performance and be king of the hill with nothing but a tire change. This seems to be very unfair to Tesla owners. There are really no upgrades that can be done to make a Tesla quicker where ICE users have infinite options to improve performance within their class. The future is electric.
Such as?
It's highly unlikely that an OEM will up the power output of your ICE just because they can, but that does actually happen with a Tesla. I know it's possible to make a little more power from an ICE, but I also know that there's no way it would be released officially to their consumers. The "legal" modifications don't really thing- which is exactly why they are legal in Stock class.
And all of the non-powertrain things that actually improve performance is equal.
You'll need to log in to post.
