[Rob Hood]

Not sure who the letter writer is pointing a finger at, but he's definitely pointing a finger...perhaps at NASA?

[rmackintosh]

Randy wrote: "I guess our difference lie in the definition of "amatuer motorsports" and what they are "designed" to do...."

Yep, that's the difference. I see "amatuer motorsports" as what the SCCA, NASA, MC, EMRA, and various other clubs do. They provide a place for us to play with our cars. Anyone think they are doing anything besides just "playing" then they need to move on to Grand Am, World Challenge, ASA, ARCA,...etc.

It's all for fun and maybe a little piece of wood/plastic that you can hang in your den.

Sidney

...yeah that's the smarmy way to look at it...but like I said...there CAN AND SHOULD be different levels of amatuer road racing....

If I choose to get more serious with my road racing and race in a place where there are ESTABLISHED sets of rules that are UNIFORM for everyone, why should I "be forced" to race with cars that don't take the time to set thier cars up to the rules....

Amatuer road racing is a BROAD CATEGORY....not a tightly defined space....THAT is my point...I see your point wholely and completely about what "amatuer racing" should be about and do...AND AGREE...but what I DISAGREE with is that ALL clubs in the amatuer realm MUST "force" themselves to fit this ideal/mold...

SCCA does not have to bend the rules to let in "casual competitors" BECAUSE that is not it's intent NOR its purpose....there are plenty of clubs out there that cater to this crowd....SCCA attempts to cater to the "serious" amatuer racer....ie NATIONAL racers...even Region racers like myself are sorta SCCA's attempt to cater to a more "casual" crowd...

And given SCCA's membership and car count at races...not to mention the entries at NASA's and other amatuer clubs that have TIGHTLY defined rule sets for classes and competition there is a big demand for "serious" road racing at an amatuer level.....some of us CANNOT afford the time/money/commitment of going World Challenge, Grand-Am, etc.....

[Sidney]

Isn't this internet thing something special. I get to debate with a fellow racer half way across the country without ever worrying that we'll race together or actually ever meet.

Just curious Randy, what class would you race in if SCCA didn't offer the regional only IT-Everything class? Exactly what rules about ITE appeal to you versus AS? If you wanted to race Nationally, what class would you modify your Camaro to fit? (I looked at ITE when I was told about the fuel rule but felt AI was a better fit to actually compete and get to run new tracks).

Sidney

[rmackintosh]

Isn't this internet thing something special. I get to debate with a fellow racer half way across the country without ever worrying that we'll race together or actually ever meet.

Sidney

...don't be so sure...I have met some guys on here that I WAS SURE I wouldn't meet... (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

Just curious Randy, what class would you race in if SCCA didn't offer the regional only IT-Everything class? Exactly what rules about ITE appeal to you versus AS? If you wanted to race Nationally, what class would you modify your Camaro to fit? (I looked at ITE when I was told about the fuel rule but felt AI was a better fit to actually compete and get to run new tracks).

Well, that is a question that would be not straight forward to answer. I am a lifelong SCCA member....crewing when I was younger and driving for the last 10 years or so....that makes my perspective MUCH different.

I did not have a Camaro and then wonder where it would fit in...a problem a lot of you/us have when looking to race these things. I had an SCCA membership, and wondered what group I wanted to run in....after 9+ years of running in a Datsun in ITC...I have ALWAYS loved Camaro's, and wanted something COMPLETELEY different from the low HP/great handling Datsun....Alan Blaine was running his Camaro to the championship when I was looking and I thought hey....I will go get a cheap Camaro on eBay and race it with him. Which I did. Now, that I am finally at the lap times where Alan was, the guys with more $$$ than me are in, and lap times have dropped quite a bit....I am struggling to get down some more....

But hey, I knew ITE was an open class, and I can't complain...the car IS fast, and fun to drive, so I am happy.

ITE appeals to me vs. AS for a couple of reasons. 1) I wouldn't have to "backdate" my car....carb motor/brakes/etc. 2)ITE is faster. 3) The run group I run in ITE is front runners vs AS runs in the back of the GT group. (after years of running in the back of the IT group in ITC, I wanted to run up front (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif) ) 4) I hear AS cars CAN be expensive to maintain and run up front 5) There is MAYBE 1-2 AS cars at the track in a given weekend here.....boring.....we are getting 20-30 cars in ITE. (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/thumbup.gif)

As far as ITE and the fuel rule....and I am NO expert on the fuel rule...ITE has the same fuel requirements as the other classes.....I have NEVER been tested, so I am not sure though....I use track gas though....

[bsim]

I hear ya Randy - I wanted to run SCCA - I've been in and around it since I was baby sized. BUT, I wanted to run a Camaro. I totally agree with you on why not to go AS. At the time I had a '92 Z28, and didn't want to tear everything out (is EFI that bad? (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/huh.gif) ). So I was pointed to ITE.

I couldn't run there since I didn't have a fuel cell (CalClub only I hear). BUT, I did see the other ITE cars (Porsche Cup cars, etc), and would have been about 40 seconds off their pace anyway. Eeeewwwww....

Hence, CMC. I have a few other opinions of org. vs. org., but I know they're personal experiences, and don't speak for every member of the series. As long as safety items aren't compromised, the racing is fun, and the competitor is happy, the org. doesn't matter. (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/beerchug.gif)

[bsim]

BTW - same goes for Corvettes. Where do they fit at a National level? Other than a new (read: expensive) model in T1?

Realy that's where it boiled down to for me - cheap (relatively) American V8 racing...

[Rob Hood]

I'd like to be able to race as much as financially possible (wouldn't we all). What I want is a class that a Camaro can effectively cross-over between 2 or more sanctioning bodies, so I can maximize my on-track time. I think HPDE's are cool (and a great starting point), but I don't want to buy/build a race-only car that gets used only at HPDE's. That's a waste of my money IMO. I do want to be in a competitive series.

I'd rather not start with an ITE car but CMC is somewhat limited depending on geographical location. AS cars can get really expensive really quick. I have been looking at ITB cars to buy and learn how to drive on them, since many basic driving techniques cross-over (no FWD cars for me).

I have had some personal issues with SCCA-sponsored events, but won't hold that against the organization entirely.

I don't mind rules, but what gets me is how the rule is interpreted, depending on which side of the fence you are on. The sanctioning body says "X," and the racer says "Y." By the same token, all cars entered an event should conform to the rules, not just those in the hunt for points/championship.

I'm not convinced the SCCA's classification structure is the best process, but don't know what would be better. I do like NASA's power-to-weight approach, which appears to help keep costs down.

This post has been edited by Rob Hood: Dec 22 2005, 11:11 PM

[rmackintosh]

I have been looking at ITB cars to buy and learn how to drive on them, since many basic driving techniques cross-over (no FWD cars for me).

ITB cars or other IT cars are AN EXCELLENT way to race on the "cheap". The trick is to do some homework and find a car that is competitive, fast, reliable, etc. and you can learn a lot for a little. Ask me how I know! (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

I'm not convinced the SCCA's classification structure is the best process, but don't know what would be better.  I do like NASA's power-to-weight approach, which appears to help keep costs down.

I agree with you there. SCCA's class structure is FAR from perfect....and I doubt NASA's is either. To be honest with you, I think TODAY NASA has a better class structure. CMC/AI/AIX is REALLY, REALLY cool! (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/2thumbs.gif) The other classes seem cool as well. Just get rid of the HPDE riff-raff that takes up 2/3rds of the paddock, and a few other idiosyncracies and I would be all over it. The problem I see with NASA and the future is all this "user friendliness" is gonna bite them sooner or later. As they keep adding classes to fit this "casual racer" or that one, they will soon get to the SCCA alphabet soup....which is stupid......there are 12-15 classes in my ONE RACE GROUP! (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/blink.gif) NASA seems to be heading this direction to make everyone happy.

My advice to NASA.....DO NOT DO THAT.....keep it simple with run groups like you have....CMC/AI/AIX...Porshces.....etc. Don't break it all up so EVERYONE and their brother has a class....keep 7-8 distinct classes and serve them well....

(and put HPDE's on their own SEPARATE weekend away from the real races. (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/ph34r.gif) )

NASA is basically the SCCA of the 80's from what I see....and they seem to be heading down the SAME EXACT PATH....

NASA.....the SCCA of 2015 (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/rotf.gif)

[firehawkclone]

Just get rid of the HPDE riff-raff that takes up 2/3rds of the paddock


put HPDE's on their own SEPARATE weekend away from the real races. (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/ph34r.gif) )

I agree with you Randy, at time's some of the HPDE people can act like turd's (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/dry.gif) But as for putting us on a separate weekend, I (and all hpde'rs) count on vetran racer's to guide and teach me (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/2thumbs.gif)

[Rob Hood]

firehawkclone Posted on Dec 22 2005, 19:51
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I agree with you Randy, at time's some of the HPDE people can act like turd's  But as for putting us on a separate weekend, I (and all hpde'rs) count on vetran racer's to guide and teach me 

Separate weekends are better than trying to cram an HPDE in with an actual race event. Unfortunately, that is sometimes unable to happen due to scheduling conflicts.

I'm also NOT a fan of multiple classes racing at the same time. If I wanted that, I'd just go hit the freeway and try to fly through the traffic!! :drive: (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/blink.gif) (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/ph34r.gif) I do realize that may not be that many cars on the track unless there were multiple classes driving and that would limit the amount of available track time for all competitors, but really slow cars should not be on the track at the same time as much faster cars. I just think that's dangerous for everyone participating. I would hope that cars of comparable lap times regardless of classification would be put on the track at the same time.