S2000 and base Boxster moved to A Stock for SCCA autocross
10-13-2004, 09:36 PM
#31
Rennlist Member
Originally Posted by Z-man
First of all, the GT3 isn't three times the price of the Vette Z06. The GT3 costs less than twice the cost of a Z06.
MSRP:
2004 Vette Z06: $52,385
2004 Porsche GT3: $101,965.
The GT3 is still a more expensive car, but NOT three times the price. I suggest you check your numbers before posting stats like that.
I'd really like for you to explain how the Acura NSX can run in AS despite it's heafty price tag AND performance.
Also: explain this: the 1993 Mazda RX-7 runs in Super Stock. According to Kelly Blue book, this car is worth around $11,000. So, the Vette Z06 is worth five times the value of the RX-7! IF you apply the same rule to the Z06 as you do to the GT3, then the Z06 shouldn't be running in SS either!
But yes I did! Perhaps I should clarify: A stock 968 costs more than twice as much as my 944S2.
According to Bruce Anderson & Excellence:
1989 944S2 in good condition: $7853.00
1995 968 in good condition: $17704.00
Note: A 968 is worth more than twice the price of my 944S2! And both cars run in SCCA's B-stock class, along with other cars that are worth many times more the value of my car! Injustice!! FOUL!!! It's not fair!!! I THINK ALL CARS MORE EXPENSIVE THAN MINE IN B-STOCK SHOULD BE DUMPED TO CSP!!!!
If I'm running in SS, how is it that I am going to spend tens of thousands of dollars on my car?!? I thought STOCK classes meant I can't really mess around with much of anything! Even if I ran the most expensive Hoosiers, and ran new tires at every event, I can't see how I'm gonna spend $10,000 on my SOLO 2 campaign. I suppose the Vette owners are cheating? Or is it that the Vette REQUIRES that much money to maintain it? If that's the case, then what's the difference between buying a Vette for $52k, spending another $50k to maintain it vs. buying a GT3 and paying $100 up front and having a worry free season?!?
Again, your numbers don't make sense. Can you please clarify how a SOLO 2 competitor in Super Stock spends "tens of thousands of dollars" on his car to be competitive. Also explain the difference between spending such money up front (ala the GT3) or spending it afterwards (ala the Z06, like you suggest).
Are you implying that unless you compete on the national level, that you don't matter?! BULL! It is the local autocross where all the national level competitors cut their teeth on autocross. Do not discount the local programs: without them, there would never be a national championship.
Our local autocross program is very competitive. I once came in second only 0.006 seconds behind my nemisis, Phil. (He was driving a 944S, BTW). Here are some other time differences between first and second place participants in various classes this year: 0.022 seconds, 0.028 seconds, 0.070 seconds, 0.043 seconds, 0.092 seconds, 0.042 seconds.... And that's just a few differences between first and second places in class!
Again, where is all this money going? Certainly not in the cars, because they aren't allowed to modify much!! Please offer a breakdown of these millions of dollars and where they are going....
First, just because a couple of national level competitors said the GT3 is too much for SS, that doesn't mean it doesn't belong there!
Second, a GT3 costs less than twice the price of a Vette Z06. If you invest "tens of thousands of dollars" into a Z06 like you state above, then the two cars become very similar in price.
Because it is not right to exclude a car from a given class just because it is priced more than the favored car! Such a decision is based completely on politics and not on the true spirit of the sport - fair competition!
Wait - you are basing your opinion that the GT3 is better than the Z06 based on TWO PEOPLE?!? Yeah, that's a staggering percentage of national level drivers!
I'll bet you a thousand bucks that BOTH of those drivers own Z06's!!! (Political, I said, political!)
Nice judgement call!
For me, here is the bottom line:
1. If you can buy "stock out of the box" car off the showroom floor, it should be able to run in stock classes, no matter what brand/marque/country of origin. (Tuner cars, like the Saleen Mustang, Ruf Porsches...etc. are obviously excluded from this.)
2. If a car outperforms all other cars in its class, it may need to be bumped up, but it should not be put in a street prepared or modified class if the car manufacturer considers it to be a street-driven stock example.
3. If a car outperforms all other cars in its class, that gives a reason for the other car manufacturers to step up to the plate and make a better car. (Why do you think the C6 Z06 will be a better car than the C5 Z06? To keep up with the competition! Same applies to racing!)
4. If the only reason a car is dumped out of a class is because it is much more expensive than the other cars running in said class, that move is politically charged and unfair.
5. If price is the reason for moving cars, then that rule should be applied to ALL cars. (NSX, for example)
I am sorry we do not see eye to eye on this subject. There is no need to act in such a way as you do here Steve. Like you stated, you are on a Porsche board - Porsche enthusiasts participate in these forums. Are we biased towards Porsches? Probably. But most of us here respect other cars as well. (IF I only had the $$ to buy a new Lotus Elise....) You have to admit that the way SCCA is going about classing the GT3, on the surface level doesn't look like they are playing fair. Yeah, the GT3's a fantastic car (I had the chance to drive one at an autocross - Thanks NJ-GT!) but that doesn't mean it should be moved out of Super Stock.
Sorry for the long post,
-Z-man.
MSRP:
2004 Vette Z06: $52,385
2004 Porsche GT3: $101,965.
The GT3 is still a more expensive car, but NOT three times the price. I suggest you check your numbers before posting stats like that.
I'd really like for you to explain how the Acura NSX can run in AS despite it's heafty price tag AND performance.
Also: explain this: the 1993 Mazda RX-7 runs in Super Stock. According to Kelly Blue book, this car is worth around $11,000. So, the Vette Z06 is worth five times the value of the RX-7! IF you apply the same rule to the Z06 as you do to the GT3, then the Z06 shouldn't be running in SS either!
But yes I did! Perhaps I should clarify: A stock 968 costs more than twice as much as my 944S2.
According to Bruce Anderson & Excellence:
1989 944S2 in good condition: $7853.00
1995 968 in good condition: $17704.00
Note: A 968 is worth more than twice the price of my 944S2! And both cars run in SCCA's B-stock class, along with other cars that are worth many times more the value of my car! Injustice!! FOUL!!! It's not fair!!! I THINK ALL CARS MORE EXPENSIVE THAN MINE IN B-STOCK SHOULD BE DUMPED TO CSP!!!!
If I'm running in SS, how is it that I am going to spend tens of thousands of dollars on my car?!? I thought STOCK classes meant I can't really mess around with much of anything! Even if I ran the most expensive Hoosiers, and ran new tires at every event, I can't see how I'm gonna spend $10,000 on my SOLO 2 campaign. I suppose the Vette owners are cheating? Or is it that the Vette REQUIRES that much money to maintain it? If that's the case, then what's the difference between buying a Vette for $52k, spending another $50k to maintain it vs. buying a GT3 and paying $100 up front and having a worry free season?!?
Again, your numbers don't make sense. Can you please clarify how a SOLO 2 competitor in Super Stock spends "tens of thousands of dollars" on his car to be competitive. Also explain the difference between spending such money up front (ala the GT3) or spending it afterwards (ala the Z06, like you suggest).
Are you implying that unless you compete on the national level, that you don't matter?! BULL! It is the local autocross where all the national level competitors cut their teeth on autocross. Do not discount the local programs: without them, there would never be a national championship.
Our local autocross program is very competitive. I once came in second only 0.006 seconds behind my nemisis, Phil. (He was driving a 944S, BTW). Here are some other time differences between first and second place participants in various classes this year: 0.022 seconds, 0.028 seconds, 0.070 seconds, 0.043 seconds, 0.092 seconds, 0.042 seconds.... And that's just a few differences between first and second places in class!
Again, where is all this money going? Certainly not in the cars, because they aren't allowed to modify much!! Please offer a breakdown of these millions of dollars and where they are going....
First, just because a couple of national level competitors said the GT3 is too much for SS, that doesn't mean it doesn't belong there!
Second, a GT3 costs less than twice the price of a Vette Z06. If you invest "tens of thousands of dollars" into a Z06 like you state above, then the two cars become very similar in price.
Because it is not right to exclude a car from a given class just because it is priced more than the favored car! Such a decision is based completely on politics and not on the true spirit of the sport - fair competition!
Wait - you are basing your opinion that the GT3 is better than the Z06 based on TWO PEOPLE?!? Yeah, that's a staggering percentage of national level drivers!
I'll bet you a thousand bucks that BOTH of those drivers own Z06's!!! (Political, I said, political!) Nice judgement call!
For me, here is the bottom line:
1. If you can buy "stock out of the box" car off the showroom floor, it should be able to run in stock classes, no matter what brand/marque/country of origin. (Tuner cars, like the Saleen Mustang, Ruf Porsches...etc. are obviously excluded from this.)
2. If a car outperforms all other cars in its class, it may need to be bumped up, but it should not be put in a street prepared or modified class if the car manufacturer considers it to be a street-driven stock example.
3. If a car outperforms all other cars in its class, that gives a reason for the other car manufacturers to step up to the plate and make a better car. (Why do you think the C6 Z06 will be a better car than the C5 Z06? To keep up with the competition! Same applies to racing!)
4. If the only reason a car is dumped out of a class is because it is much more expensive than the other cars running in said class, that move is politically charged and unfair.
5. If price is the reason for moving cars, then that rule should be applied to ALL cars. (NSX, for example)
I am sorry we do not see eye to eye on this subject. There is no need to act in such a way as you do here Steve. Like you stated, you are on a Porsche board - Porsche enthusiasts participate in these forums. Are we biased towards Porsches? Probably. But most of us here respect other cars as well. (IF I only had the $$ to buy a new Lotus Elise....) You have to admit that the way SCCA is going about classing the GT3, on the surface level doesn't look like they are playing fair. Yeah, the GT3's a fantastic car (I had the chance to drive one at an autocross - Thanks NJ-GT!) but that doesn't mean it should be moved out of Super Stock.
Sorry for the long post,
-Z-man.
10-14-2004, 02:31 AM
#33
Three Wheelin'
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Indianapolis, IN
Posts: 1,752
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hey guys... I thought that I would post this in order to stop all the arguing... If y'all would keep up with the SCCA forums 
http://www.sccaforums.com/cgi-bin/ul.../topic/18/833?
It turns out that the GT3 is officially moved to SS where it belongs!!
http://www.sccaforums.com/cgi-bin/ul.../topic/18/833?
It turns out that the GT3 is officially moved to SS where it belongs!!
10-17-2004, 02:36 AM
#34
2nd Gear
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Nashville, TN
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wow, been away for too long. Anyway, I thought I would kick in my $0.02.
Steve is basically right about what the SCCA is thinking. I too happen to think they have some strange rules & regulations but they probably have the best system out there. If I may, I will respond to selected quotes:
Cars in the SCCA are never classed based on performance alone otherwise Porsche would win just about everything like they do in ALMS GT and Grand-Am SGS. Only in SCCA Speed World Challenge do Porsches not dominate the lowest tiered class. That's because the SCCA believes, rightly so I think, that having one manufacturer dominate will lead to all the other manufacturers leaving the series as has happened before in other series long gone. A different philosophy, but so far it seems to be the best one as World Challenge races are very exciting and balanced, with a few notable exceptions (Audi, Cadillac).
The SCCA does not guarantee any car a class of its own. Cars come and go and performance usually improves along the way. In SS, C4's dominated until 1994 when the Viper won and then RX-7's won the next five years in a row. In 2000, the C5 started its win streak. Incidentally, the RX-7 was bumped up from AS where it won from 1992 to 1994. This seems to happen a lot in Solo2 classes. A new car comes out, wins a class for a few years and then some other car comes out and replaces it as the must have car for a class. Along the way, cars are moved around to different classes as time progresses and they become less competitive in a class they used to own or show well in.
No disrespect intended but SCCA credentials are the only ones that count. Until you have been to a SCCA National level event and trophied, you can claim all the victories and experience you want, but it don't mean much (even then, it won't mean much if there is only one car in the class). Heck I've won those same awards myself (Stock class FTD, Overall FTD, whatever) in non-SCCA or small region SCCA clubs but I still get beat handily by a guy who trophied at this years SCCA Solo2 National Championship.
Yes, you assume correctly that the SCCA wants to encourage beginners but that does not mean that your car must always be the best in a class. Most good autocrossers start in one car and soon realize that if they want to be nationally competative, they have to buy a car that is competitive in a given class. Erik Strelnieks won SS in 1999 with a RX-7 but saw the writing on the wall in 2000 (C5) and bought one (a Z06). He won SS again in 2002. That is what national level drivers do, beginners need not do the same and as Steve has pointed out, at the regional level it is much more driver skill than car which determines who is quickest.
It makes a lot of sense since the highest finishing 1.5 Miata (Brian, the guy who keeps stomping me locally) had a combined time of 101.516 and the ES champion ran a 99.757. Almost two seconds. Now granted, Brian is a great driver but he may not be the fastest in a 1.5 Miata so in theory, some other person may be faster but two seconds is a lot of time to make up for that skill level. So 944 owners now may have more competition due to the large numbers of 1.5 Miatas but they should not be any quicker than the MR2's
In regards to the CooperS, how is it dominating GS when no driver in one has won the National Chanmpionship yet? I do agree that perhaps it should be reclassed maybe even to ES. I don't think they would be at all competitive in DS.
One last thing, your reference to underpowered Miata's is confusing. Up until the MazdaSpeed Miata (with turbo), all Miata's are underpowered!
I should know, I have one.
That would mean more classes. Ask most veteran SCCA members what we need less of and they will probably say classes. I mean, there are so many and more are being considered all the time. And the classes don't even make sense. In autox, the three most important factors for a car (besides the driver) are tires, hp/weight ratio and weight/size. It is not fair for larger cars to go against small cars with similar hp/weight ratio because the smaller car will almost always have an advantage. In my opinion, classes should be derived from a formula based on those factors.
You can spend a lot of money to make a car nationally "prepped" even in the stock classes. Breakdown is as follows: Penske shocks ($500 a corner), front sway bar, autox brake pads, tires (Hoosiers run around $200 a tire, maybe three or four sets a year for a national competitor), lightweight wheels ($1000+ a set, must have same dimensions as stock), rebore engine (allowed to first manufacturers standard overbore), balance engine, dyno time, etc. It can be costly if you go this route but some do no matter what car they compete with.
Porsche enthusiats, like enthusiats of any car, tend to be biased. SCCA members (like the ones who hold an office) tend to be more car enthusiats in general. We love Porsche's, Ferrari's, Lamborghini's, Mazda's, Ford's, etc. With so many different people that have varied tastes and opinions, it is harder to actively maintain a negative campaign against any one car, company, or person. They make group decisions based on group discussion. It would be different if only one or two people made these decisions where bias could easily enter in but I can't see it with the numbers of people that are involved with decision making.
I am pretty certain that no car manufacturer ever thinks about Solo2 when designing a car. They simply could care less for anything except full out racing. I mean, the whole SCCA is barely a blip on their radar. They design a car to sell to the general populace, not to car people, not even Porsche anymore (unfortunate as that is).
I have no beef in this discussion but I have been an SCCA member for several years as well as a Porsche guy for most of my life. Steve is correct on his main points, although maybe he placed too much emphasis on car price as to how big a factor it is in Solo2 classing. Anyway really sorry for the long rant,
Dimitri
Steve is basically right about what the SCCA is thinking. I too happen to think they have some strange rules & regulations but they probably have the best system out there. If I may, I will respond to selected quotes:
Originally Posted by Z-man
And all along I thought classification was based on car performance, not car price!
-Z.
-Z.
Originally Posted by 85Gold
Pedal Faster
I have to agree that using price as a criteria for classing is WRONG. The GT3 has a production run of app. 750 cars so it is not an extreme case as you stated above. Yes it is a high performance car but why should the SCCA guarantee the Vette a class of its own. It is boring to watch only one model run in SS. Would you advocate moving the 993 to SS or ASP because it won the Pro-Solo national championship in AS beating the vette's.
Peter
I have to agree that using price as a criteria for classing is WRONG. The GT3 has a production run of app. 750 cars so it is not an extreme case as you stated above. Yes it is a high performance car but why should the SCCA guarantee the Vette a class of its own. It is boring to watch only one model run in SS. Would you advocate moving the 993 to SS or ASP because it won the Pro-Solo national championship in AS beating the vette's.
Peter
Originally Posted by DrJupeman
I interpret your posts to suggest that cars are classed more by cost than by potential. I still think this is wrong. Why not just class cars by their potential?
If you read what I wrote more carefully you might see that I think they are ignoring the reality of some cars' performance and price.
I think I do know better, I am a past NNJR-PCA autocross chairmen, multiple FTD and season champion autocrosser. I talk with some credentials. They might not be vaunted SCCA credentials, but I do have some experience.
I'd love it if you could defend the 930 being in SS. It would seem it passes all the criteria that you think makes for a fair classing.
I'd also like you to explain how you think forcing a person to buy a 2nd dedicated autocross car ("one could easily afford a $5000 M1.5 Miata")
is a better system than letting a person run the car they already own. Not everyone is a national level autocrosser, some folks just want to enjoy the car they've already bought. I assume the SCCA wants to encourage beginners...
If you read what I wrote more carefully you might see that I think they are ignoring the reality of some cars' performance and price.
I think I do know better, I am a past NNJR-PCA autocross chairmen, multiple FTD and season champion autocrosser. I talk with some credentials. They might not be vaunted SCCA credentials, but I do have some experience.
I'd love it if you could defend the 930 being in SS. It would seem it passes all the criteria that you think makes for a fair classing.
I'd also like you to explain how you think forcing a person to buy a 2nd dedicated autocross car ("one could easily afford a $5000 M1.5 Miata")
is a better system than letting a person run the car they already own. Not everyone is a national level autocrosser, some folks just want to enjoy the car they've already bought. I assume the SCCA wants to encourage beginners...
Yes, you assume correctly that the SCCA wants to encourage beginners but that does not mean that your car must always be the best in a class. Most good autocrossers start in one car and soon realize that if they want to be nationally competative, they have to buy a car that is competitive in a given class. Erik Strelnieks won SS in 1999 with a RX-7 but saw the writing on the wall in 2000 (C5) and bought one (a Z06). He won SS again in 2002. That is what national level drivers do, beginners need not do the same and as Steve has pointed out, at the regional level it is much more driver skill than car which determines who is quickest.
Originally Posted by wombat7
Personally I feel that moving the Miata down to ES is ludacris. The Miatas have been competeing fairly well CS with the MR2 Spyders, yet now they decide to move them down with the underpowered miatas. That is absolutly crazy. Now 944 owners have even less of a chance in ES than we already did. Previously, the MR2s dominted ES and the miatas they moved down are quicker then them. HOW DOES THAT MAKE SENSE??? Secondly, I personally feel that the Mini Cooper S should be moved to DS like they had originally talked about. They are dominating GS, and would be competitive DS with the WRX and SRT4 etc. That makes a lot more sense than moving the miatas down or the boxster and S2K up.
In regards to the CooperS, how is it dominating GS when no driver in one has won the National Chanmpionship yet? I do agree that perhaps it should be reclassed maybe even to ES. I don't think they would be at all competitive in DS.
One last thing, your reference to underpowered Miata's is confusing. Up until the MazdaSpeed Miata (with turbo), all Miata's are underpowered!
I should know, I have one.
Originally Posted by Z-man
Ok, while I don't agree with that logic, if that is what they are trying to do, then I understand their motive, but I still don't agree with their decisions.
Here's another way to look at it:
If cars like the Porsche GT3 and Ferarri 360 Stradale so dominate their class (Super-Stock in this case), perhaps 'lesser' cars should be bumped DOWN instead of said cars benig bumped out of the stock classes, even though they are stock by the rules of SCCA.
Put The Z06 in A-stock, and do a 'tricle down' method of reclassification to all stock classes. It makes more sense.
-Z.
Here's another way to look at it:
If cars like the Porsche GT3 and Ferarri 360 Stradale so dominate their class (Super-Stock in this case), perhaps 'lesser' cars should be bumped DOWN instead of said cars benig bumped out of the stock classes, even though they are stock by the rules of SCCA.
Put The Z06 in A-stock, and do a 'tricle down' method of reclassification to all stock classes. It makes more sense.
-Z.
Originally Posted by Z-man
If I'm running in SS, how is it that I am going to spend tens of thousands of dollars on my car?!? I thought STOCK classes meant I can't really mess around with much of anything! Even if I ran the most expensive Hoosiers, and ran new tires at every event, I can't see how I'm gonna spend $10,000 on my SOLO 2 campaign. I suppose the Vette owners are cheating? Or is it that the Vette REQUIRES that much money to maintain it? If that's the case, then what's the difference between buying a Vette for $52k, spending another $50k to maintain it vs. buying a GT3 and paying $100 up front and having a worry free season?!?
Again, your numbers don't make sense. Can you please clarify how a SOLO 2 competitor in Super Stock spends "tens of thousands of dollars" on his car to be competitive. Also explain the difference between spending such money up front (ala the GT3) or spending it afterwards (ala the Z06, like you suggest).
Are you implying that unless you compete on the national level, that you don't matter?! BULL! It is the local autocross where all the national level competitors cut their teeth on autocross. Do not discount the local programs: without them, there would never be a national championship.
Our local autocross program is very competitive. I once came in second only 0.006 seconds behind my nemisis, Phil. (He was driving a 944S, BTW). Here are some other time differences between first and second place participants in various classes this year: 0.022 seconds, 0.028 seconds, 0.070 seconds, 0.043 seconds, 0.092 seconds, 0.042 seconds.... And that's just a few differences between first and second places in class!
Again, where is all this money going? Certainly not in the cars, because they aren't allowed to modify much!! Please offer a breakdown of these millions of dollars and where they are going....
Because it is not right to exclude a car from a given class just because it is priced more than the favored car! Such a decision is based completely on politics and not on the true spirit of the sport - fair competition!
Wait - you are basing your opinion that the GT3 is better than the Z06 based on TWO PEOPLE?!? Yeah, that's a staggering percentage of national level drivers! I'll bet you a thousand bucks that BOTH of those drivers own Z06's!!! (Political, I said, political!)
Nice judgement call!
For me, here is the bottom line:
1. If you can buy "stock out of the box" car off the showroom floor, it should be able to run in stock classes, no matter what brand/marque/country of origin. (Tuner cars, like the Saleen Mustang, Ruf Porsches...etc. are obviously excluded from this.)
2. If a car outperforms all other cars in its class, it may need to be bumped up, but it should not be put in a street prepared or modified class if the car manufacturer considers it to be a street-driven stock example.
3. If a car outperforms all other cars in its class, that gives a reason for the other car manufacturers to step up to the plate and make a better car. (Why do you think the C6 Z06 will be a better car than the C5 Z06? To keep up with the competition! Same applies to racing!)
4. If the only reason a car is dumped out of a class is because it is much more expensive than the other cars running in said class, that move is politically charged and unfair.
5. If price is the reason for moving cars, then that rule should be applied to ALL cars. (NSX, for example)
I am sorry we do not see eye to eye on this subject. There is no need to act in such a way as you do here Steve. Like you stated, you are on a Porsche board - Porsche enthusiasts participate in these forums. Are we biased towards Porsches? Probably. But most of us here respect other cars as well. (IF I only had the $$ to buy a new Lotus Elise....) You have to admit that the way SCCA is going about classing the GT3, on the surface level doesn't look like they are playing fair. Yeah, the GT3's a fantastic car (I had the chance to drive one at an autocross - Thanks NJ-GT!) but that doesn't mean it should be moved out of Super Stock.
Sorry for the long post,
-Z-man.
Again, your numbers don't make sense. Can you please clarify how a SOLO 2 competitor in Super Stock spends "tens of thousands of dollars" on his car to be competitive. Also explain the difference between spending such money up front (ala the GT3) or spending it afterwards (ala the Z06, like you suggest).
Are you implying that unless you compete on the national level, that you don't matter?! BULL! It is the local autocross where all the national level competitors cut their teeth on autocross. Do not discount the local programs: without them, there would never be a national championship.
Our local autocross program is very competitive. I once came in second only 0.006 seconds behind my nemisis, Phil. (He was driving a 944S, BTW). Here are some other time differences between first and second place participants in various classes this year: 0.022 seconds, 0.028 seconds, 0.070 seconds, 0.043 seconds, 0.092 seconds, 0.042 seconds.... And that's just a few differences between first and second places in class!
Again, where is all this money going? Certainly not in the cars, because they aren't allowed to modify much!! Please offer a breakdown of these millions of dollars and where they are going....
Because it is not right to exclude a car from a given class just because it is priced more than the favored car! Such a decision is based completely on politics and not on the true spirit of the sport - fair competition!
Wait - you are basing your opinion that the GT3 is better than the Z06 based on TWO PEOPLE?!? Yeah, that's a staggering percentage of national level drivers!
I'll bet you a thousand bucks that BOTH of those drivers own Z06's!!! (Political, I said, political!) Nice judgement call!
For me, here is the bottom line:
1. If you can buy "stock out of the box" car off the showroom floor, it should be able to run in stock classes, no matter what brand/marque/country of origin. (Tuner cars, like the Saleen Mustang, Ruf Porsches...etc. are obviously excluded from this.)
2. If a car outperforms all other cars in its class, it may need to be bumped up, but it should not be put in a street prepared or modified class if the car manufacturer considers it to be a street-driven stock example.
3. If a car outperforms all other cars in its class, that gives a reason for the other car manufacturers to step up to the plate and make a better car. (Why do you think the C6 Z06 will be a better car than the C5 Z06? To keep up with the competition! Same applies to racing!)
4. If the only reason a car is dumped out of a class is because it is much more expensive than the other cars running in said class, that move is politically charged and unfair.
5. If price is the reason for moving cars, then that rule should be applied to ALL cars. (NSX, for example)
I am sorry we do not see eye to eye on this subject. There is no need to act in such a way as you do here Steve. Like you stated, you are on a Porsche board - Porsche enthusiasts participate in these forums. Are we biased towards Porsches? Probably. But most of us here respect other cars as well. (IF I only had the $$ to buy a new Lotus Elise....) You have to admit that the way SCCA is going about classing the GT3, on the surface level doesn't look like they are playing fair. Yeah, the GT3's a fantastic car (I had the chance to drive one at an autocross - Thanks NJ-GT!) but that doesn't mean it should be moved out of Super Stock.
Sorry for the long post,
-Z-man.
Porsche enthusiats, like enthusiats of any car, tend to be biased. SCCA members (like the ones who hold an office) tend to be more car enthusiats in general. We love Porsche's, Ferrari's, Lamborghini's, Mazda's, Ford's, etc. With so many different people that have varied tastes and opinions, it is harder to actively maintain a negative campaign against any one car, company, or person. They make group decisions based on group discussion. It would be different if only one or two people made these decisions where bias could easily enter in but I can't see it with the numbers of people that are involved with decision making.
I am pretty certain that no car manufacturer ever thinks about Solo2 when designing a car. They simply could care less for anything except full out racing. I mean, the whole SCCA is barely a blip on their radar. They design a car to sell to the general populace, not to car people, not even Porsche anymore (unfortunate as that is).
I have no beef in this discussion but I have been an SCCA member for several years as well as a Porsche guy for most of my life. Steve is correct on his main points, although maybe he placed too much emphasis on car price as to how big a factor it is in Solo2 classing. Anyway really sorry for the long rant,
Dimitri
10-18-2004, 11:47 AM
#35
Race Director
Dimitri:
Your comments are appreciated. A couple of comments:
Re-vamping the classes may not necessarily mean more classes need to be added to the current structure. But the truth of the matter is that there are more and more cars being developed by car manufacturers that are simply over-shadowing cars that were the cream of the crop just a few years ago. The car market is always in an evolutionary process: it is fluid and dynamic. I think SCCA is doing their best to keep up with new cars, but at a certain point, a real big reclassification may be necessary, in order to a.) put the newer cars into their proper category, and b.) move the older cars into a class where they are more competitive.
I consider myself FIRST a car enthusiast, second a Porsche enthusiast. Why did I pick Porsche over other cars? A lot of it has to do with the Porsche club. The NNJR PCA region of PCA is the biggest region of PCA. They have a well developed program for all things Porsche - DE, autocross, rally, concours, social events...etc. One of the lots PCA uses for autox is 20 minutes away from my house! (Giants Stadium parking lot) The closest SCCA lot (Englishtown) is about an hour and half away. SCCA doesn't offer a "Driver's Ed" program for track driving, which is something I am really into. With the growing poplarity of this venue, I am uncertain why they haven't developed such a program: it would help generate more interest in the club and help educate drivers.
Before I bought my Porsche, I considered getting everything from BMW's to Fiats to Alfa's. Even had a Toyota MR2 MKII for a while. Why did I go with Porsche? Porsche makes great sports cars, and there is a well organized club that supports this marque. I know there are other great sports car manufacturers, and great clubs. For now, I've been very happy with my Porsche and my club, so I have no reason to find something else.
That said, I have always felt the need to get involved with a non-Porsche car club to see how I fare against other brands. Sure, I have fun beating new 911's at autox, and passing some 911 turbos on the track in my lowly 944
but often I wonder how I stack up with 'the rest of the world.' I suppose I'll have to check out the SCCA action at E-town next season: I think those Honda S2000's will likely put me in my place!
I do hope that Pedal Faster hasn't left here - while this thread has gotten a little out of hand, it's just because we are all passionate about cars, and we all get quite emotional about our toys! (Who ever said men don't understand emotion! )
-Z-man.
Your comments are appreciated. A couple of comments:
Originally Posted by Dimitri
That would mean more classes. Ask most veteran SCCA members what we need less of and they will probably say classes. I mean, there are so many and more are being considered all the time.
Originally Posted by Dimitri
Porsche enthusiats, like enthusiats of any car, tend to be biased. SCCA members (like the ones who hold an office) tend to be more car enthusiats in general. We love Porsche's, Ferrari's, Lamborghini's, Mazda's, Ford's, etc.
Before I bought my Porsche, I considered getting everything from BMW's to Fiats to Alfa's. Even had a Toyota MR2 MKII for a while. Why did I go with Porsche? Porsche makes great sports cars, and there is a well organized club that supports this marque. I know there are other great sports car manufacturers, and great clubs. For now, I've been very happy with my Porsche and my club, so I have no reason to find something else.
That said, I have always felt the need to get involved with a non-Porsche car club to see how I fare against other brands. Sure, I have fun beating new 911's at autox, and passing some 911 turbos on the track in my lowly 944
but often I wonder how I stack up with 'the rest of the world.' I suppose I'll have to check out the SCCA action at E-town next season: I think those Honda S2000's will likely put me in my place! I do hope that Pedal Faster hasn't left here - while this thread has gotten a little out of hand, it's just because we are all passionate about cars, and we all get quite emotional about our toys! (Who ever said men don't understand emotion!
)-Z-man.
10-19-2004, 11:02 AM
#36
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: MA
Posts: 1,010
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A little late to this thread, but I'll make some random observations which are purely personal opinion.
A) I'm not real familiar with SCCA classifications, all I know is that locally when I run my 996 with H&R coil overs, I run in ASP, so does my friend's 993 twin turbo. So did my 1970 911 with suspension modifications before I dumped the 3.6 in it. All in the same classification. Radically different cars, radically different power to weight ratios, etc. all thrown in together. To me, it seems that SCCA is really not interested in Porsches, with exception of the Boxster, as it is perceived as affordable. The others are really of no interest to them.
B) The $$$ argument is silly and in my experience, isn't even a reflection of reality. I know of people of have built up their "stock" honda to a point where they have over $40Gs invested (acquiring stock Japanese non US spec headlight for example, saving a few pounds and costing hundreds of $$$.) In the end they have a car worth 5 grand. When the move on it cost them $35K. They'd be better off financing a GT3 and selling after a year or two...they lose far less money. In the end racing in any form is never cheap.
C) Of course its silly to talk about how wronged Porsches are when there's the Lotus example, Europas, Sevens, Elise have all been p[enalized for having a winning formula and the $$$ argument certainly doesn't hold for them. Personally, I think the SCCA should rename itself to the SSCA (sporst sedan club of america). Anything thats a true sports car, unless of American manufacture, is automatically classed to lose.
D) What the hell is the problem classing cars by weight and HP/weight or displacement and taking the politics out of it? Why couldn't you have stock classes that are say,
1750-2000lb sub 2 liter, 2-3liter 3-4liter
2000-2250lbs sub 2L, 2-3L, 3-4L
etc...
E) Regardless of whether or not you believe there is a conspiracy in the SCCA as to classifications, the fact remains that there are many who perceive there is and this winds up defeating the primary purpose of the club, which is to bring together owners of disparate makes togehter in friendly, fair competition.
A) I'm not real familiar with SCCA classifications, all I know is that locally when I run my 996 with H&R coil overs, I run in ASP, so does my friend's 993 twin turbo. So did my 1970 911 with suspension modifications before I dumped the 3.6 in it. All in the same classification. Radically different cars, radically different power to weight ratios, etc. all thrown in together. To me, it seems that SCCA is really not interested in Porsches, with exception of the Boxster, as it is perceived as affordable. The others are really of no interest to them.
B) The $$$ argument is silly and in my experience, isn't even a reflection of reality. I know of people of have built up their "stock" honda to a point where they have over $40Gs invested (acquiring stock Japanese non US spec headlight for example, saving a few pounds and costing hundreds of $$$.) In the end they have a car worth 5 grand. When the move on it cost them $35K. They'd be better off financing a GT3 and selling after a year or two...they lose far less money. In the end racing in any form is never cheap.
C) Of course its silly to talk about how wronged Porsches are when there's the Lotus example, Europas, Sevens, Elise have all been p[enalized for having a winning formula and the $$$ argument certainly doesn't hold for them. Personally, I think the SCCA should rename itself to the SSCA (sporst sedan club of america). Anything thats a true sports car, unless of American manufacture, is automatically classed to lose.
D) What the hell is the problem classing cars by weight and HP/weight or displacement and taking the politics out of it? Why couldn't you have stock classes that are say,
1750-2000lb sub 2 liter, 2-3liter 3-4liter
2000-2250lbs sub 2L, 2-3L, 3-4L
etc...
E) Regardless of whether or not you believe there is a conspiracy in the SCCA as to classifications, the fact remains that there are many who perceive there is and this winds up defeating the primary purpose of the club, which is to bring together owners of disparate makes togehter in friendly, fair competition.
10-21-2004, 11:16 PM
#37
Rennlist Member
Sorry that I'm late, and didn't read all of the previous posts, but the recent SCCA Solo National Championship results speak to Porsche's competitiveness, at least at the top level. Many of these drivers pick the marque they think they have a good chance to win with, and they rarely pick Porsches anymore. As indicated previously, Vettes ruled SS again, taking the top 14 places. A 996 was 15th. Vettes also took the top two places in AS, then came a S2000. 993s finished 4th and 8th, and a Boxster S was 16th. In BS S2000s ruled, taking the top 16 places. The first Boxster was 32nd. A GT3 did finish 3rd in ASP behind two Vettes, and another GT3 finished 7th. I run my 911 RSA locally in ASP, where my stiffest competition now is from Vettes (several years ago it was from other 911s).
