SCCA Mineral Wells Marque Club Challenge

For those of you who haven't tried a SCCA and/or a Pro-Solo event before here's a great chance:


Mineral Wells Marque Club Challenge

The SCCA has created a new program at the Mineral Wells ProSolo aimed at marque club members who have never participated in ProSolo events before. Entrants will be given a free SCCA Trial Membership and a special class will be created so that marque club members can compete amongst themselves for bragging rights and cash prizes!

• For the Mineral Wells event the new Marque Club Challenge class is open only to competitors new to ProSolo (defined as drivers who have not run a ProSolo event in the last 5 years).

• The class is open to any make or model of car that can pass a basic safety inspection.

• They will be placed together in an index class based on how their car would be classed in SCCA Solo classes. If we get enough entries we can divide the classes by Marque so the BMW’s can run against each other, the S2000’s can run against each other, etc.

• Each entrant will be given a free SCCA Trial Membership (valid for 15 days). Within 30 days of the event entrants may apply this Trial Membership toward a $15 discount on a full SCCA membership.

• Entrants will pay the standard $85 ProSolo entry fee.

• After class competition is completed, the top drivers scored by index will be automatically entered into the Marque Club Challenge, a single-elimination runoff to determine an overall winner. If there are 4 or fewer entrants, it will be a 2-car runoff. If there are 5 or more entrants it will be a 4-car runoff.

• The overall winner will receive a free 1-year SCCA membership, a free ProSolo entry at a future event, and a $75 cash prize from Vorshlag Motorsports. The Runner-Up will receive a free ProSolo entry to a future event and $25 cash prize from Vorshlag Motorsports.


How to enter:

• Pre-entry is required. Entrants must download the ProSolo entry form and fax it to the attention of Nancy Downing at the fax number shown on the form. (Online entries will not be accepted for this class.)

• Payment can be made by credit card on the fax form or by bringing a check to the event.

• Late fees have been waived for this event. We will accept entries into the Marque Club Challenge as late as 7:00 Friday evening at the event site. However, we are asking all competitors to please fax their entries in to Nancy no later than Wednesday, May 17 if at all possible.

• Prior to the event drivers should try to familiarize themselves with the SCCA Solo and ProSolo rules which area available for download from the SCCA website at tinyurl.com/en4nq. Novice instruction in starting procedures and event format will be available on Friday afternoon and evening at the event.

• Drivers should bring their own Snell SA 95 or newer helmet as loaners will not be available at the site.

• Drivers should try to prepare their own easily legible car numbers and class letters according to section 3.7 of the SCCA Solo Rules, e.g. numbers minimum 8" tall, class letters minimum 4" tall. (The class designation will be "MC") Required decals will be available at the event site free of charge.

More details and information about the Mineral Wells ProSolo can be found on the SCCA website at tinyurl.com/kvm3e


Other questions can be addressed to Bob Tunnell at BobSCCA@BimmerHaus.com before Wednesday, May 17.

'95 Formula For sale

Well after almost 10 years of continuous f-body ownership, I am finally getting out of them by putting my 'bird up forsale. I really hate to do it but with my new project ('56 Nomad) along with my wife's revived interest in autocrossing her car, I just can't have three project vehicles.

The car really is "done". There really isn't any part of the 'bird that hasn't been improved upon. Sure, there are always a few tweaks here and there (and I can share with you my thoughts) but overall the car is really good to go. It runs great and handles awesome. I put together a very complete webpage which should answer most of you questions about the car http://rdupont.brinkster.net/f.html. Should you want any more pics of something specific, please ask and I'll do my best to take them for you.

Please feel free to pass this on to any of your friends or local boards. I'd really like to see the car go to a f-body enthusiast who will really appreciate it for what it is. The car is located in Dallas, TX and I am willing to work with out-of-town buyer as far as delivery.

McCall

National Event Pics and Videos

See what you missed out on this year =8-) I was good to meet a few FRRAX members though and hopefully they are hooked now. Next year's NFME, the 11th annual, will be in June in Indy. Mark your calendars now!

http://www.pontiactorque.com/NFME/pics-day1/

http://www.pontiactorque.com/NFME/pics-day2/

http://www.pontiactorque.com/NFME/pics-day3/

http://sccola.org/eastla/nfme05album/

http://www.johnspics.net/fbody/day2/

http://www.johnspics.net/fbody/day1/

http://www.jimd.com/M05/05-05-05/index.htm

http://www.knology.net/~dtw1/Memphis%2005/

http://the-art-place.com/fbodypics2005.htm

http://www.omacpackaging.com/Memphisweb/Me...emphis2005.html

http://www.eecis.udel.edu/~davis/z28/Memph...arkF/Group1.wmv - 20 min video

http://www.eecis.udel.edu/~davis/z28/Memph...e-Carlin-McCall. - another session, much shorter

*note- do not use these images unless you ask permission of the website owner first

Event info can be found here:

- Information and Registration here: http://www.fbody-event.org
- Email list info: http://lists.f-body.org/mailman/listinfo/event
- NEW FORUMS: http://www.fbody-event.org/forums/announce...cement.php?f=11

McCall

How the Press Let down Detroit

Wow, this article was just so good IMHO that I just have to post the transcript to it here:

How the Press Let Down Detroit
http://www.blueovalnews.com/2005/products/...s.3.18apr05.htm

"The press, these days, is full of wannabe CEOs offering free advice to Ford and GM. This is nothing new. For the past two decades the worst advice to Detroit has routinely come from the media. However, inaccuracy, hypocrisy, and specious reasoning in automotive reporting has reached a level today where it galls me to read it, and I am nearly too choked with disgust to speak of it, to discuss it, or even to condemn it.

Do I say that the worst advice to Detroit comes from the press? Yes. Why? Because the press has advised Detroit to put style ahead of substance time and time again. Even today, even as Detroit marketshare continues to slide, we find the same tired old advice. Advice that was as inaccurate twenty years ago as it is today. Over and over again enthusiast writers, marketing gurus, business reporters, columnists, analysts, indeed everyone and their uncle can be found saying things like, "There has to be excitement." That quote was from the Friday, April 15, 2005, New York Times. The author of that quote? The former head of American Motors. I am left scratching my head as to why a reporter would grant even a half an ounce of credence to the advice offered by the head of an automotive company that was headed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy before being purchased by Chrysler.

Style and excitement are no substitutes for quality and consistency. It seems shocking that the press can set Toyota as the gold standard, and miss that fundamental point. Toyota built its passenger car business on quality and consistency. One does not wonder about a Toyota Camry when one buys it. There is NO substitute for that feeling.

To illustrate the dangers of listening to the press, let's talk about Hyundai and Kia, and where they were a decade ago. One company was barely in the U.S. at all, the other was considered only slightly above the Yugo in desirability and quality. Today both have strong presences in the U.S., and they continue to gain marketshare. Why? What enabled Hyundai and Kia to make such progress? I'm guessing that instead of listening to the advice of journalists, they took successful cars, SUVs, and minivans like the Camry, Corolla, Civic, Accord, Caravan, and Explorer, and set about copying them as slavishly as possible. They figured out what worked, and they emulated it. The result is dramatically increased quality rankings, products more in line with consumer tastes and along with that, consumer respect.

What has happened in Detroit during the same stretch of time? Declining marketshare, and declining respect for the domestics. Why? Too much attention paid to the press. First, analysts spent much of the 90s criticizing the Big Three for making less money per unit than Toyota, carelessly ignoring the much higher labor costs in unionized factories. Granted, the Big Three bear the blame for heeding such feculent advice, but they certainly were pressured by the press to cut corners on platform investment to boost profits. This had the inevitable effect of lowering vehicle quality and competitiveness. Second, the press then, as today, argued that "excitement" is a suitable replacement for "quality." The "excitement" factor mentioned above was sought at the expense of enhanced quality. Again, ultimately the Big Three bear responsibility for those mistakes, but again, who was always there praising 'radical' design, while poking fun of Japanese cars for being 'boring'? Third, through inordinate reporting of exotic and specialty cars, the press has fostered a belief in the "halo" car, a car that improves the appearance of the brand through the magic of its mere existence. Thus we saw the Dodge Viper, the Plymouth Prowler, various performance tunes of the Corvette, and the Ford Thunderbird all built at the expense of meaningful improvement to volume selling vehicles. Even today, the press will happily expend barrels of ink and whole forests of paper in praise of "halo" vehicles that will not make the mainstream vehicles in the lineup any more competitive.

The Big Three have paid dearly for taking such ridiculous advice, and they have paid for advocating such ridiculous priorities. They have paid through declining marketshare and declining consumer trust. But no one has called the press to account for their role in this. Blithely, the same questionable advice appears time and time again, as though the fault were still with the Big Three for failing to follow the advice properly, as opposed to the seemingly inconceivable notion that the advice itself is flawed.

Maybe you don't believe me when I say that bad advice still abounds? Well, the New York Times article cited above has this other gem of wisdom embedded in it, "Many analysts see a recipe for success in Chrysler ... the company's recent recovery has been driven by hot sales of a few key products."

The level of contempt I have for someone who would propose such a scattershot approach to product development as a means of improving the lot of companies that are half again and twice the size of Chrysler simply cannot be put into words. It defies description that someone could in good conscience cash a paycheck after having written such irresponsible advice. Such pointless, unsound, irredeemably bad advice has no place in journalism. Has 'hot sales of a few key products' been the 'recipe for success' at Honda? At Toyota? At Hyundai? At Kia? Should Ford gamble the future of 340,000 employees on "hot sales of a few key products"?

And, unfortunately for my temper and my patience, the author of this piece is by no means the exception to the rule.

Then there's inaccuracy in reporting. How often have Toyota and Honda been held up as paragons of environmental research and responsibility? Why in this very same article, we have this demonstrably untrue statement about Honda and Toyota, "they ... are far ahead in developing fuel efficient hybrid-electric cars."


First of all, Honda does not offer the most efficient form of hybrid drive, the so-called dual-mode hybrid drive that allows a vehicle to move on pure electric power. Only Ford and Toyota offer such systems. Then there is the Escape HEV, it achieves about a 50% increase in EPA rated fuel economy over the conventional Escape. By contrast, the hybrid Lexus RX400h achieves only about a 30% increase in fuel economy over the conventionally powered model. In comparable applications, the Ford hybrid delivers a greater improvement in fuel economy.

The hybrid system Ford designed from the ground up has not been compared head to head with the system designed by Toyota, and so meaningful statements about relative advancement are not possible. No study has placed the Toyota hybrid system ahead of Ford's, no valid data can be submitted to justify such a statement. Therefore, the placement of such a statement in the New York Times is gross journalistic negligence. This statement is not a self-evident truth. If something like this is going to be printed for public consumption we expect the good people behind the editor's desks at the New York Times to at least substantiate the claims being made, and that's all they are. Claims. Were this an advertisement for a Toyota or Honda product, they would have to cite a study in order to make such a claim. But, since this is only a news article, no such standards apply.

Once again, at the expense of my blood pressure, and my desire to avoid swearing and foul language, this wildly inaccurate statement is, by now, the unquestionable received truth about Toyota and Honda hybrids. The media's unwillingness to give credit to Bill Ford's environmental commitment without raising questions about his motivation is in sharp contrast to the face-value acceptance of reasons offered by Honda and Toyota for their environmental concern. Apparently only American executives can be duplicitous and self-serving.

The insistence on style and "excitement", and the willingness to dismiss any efforts by Ford to emulate "Asian" platform strategies bespeaks a dysfunctional codependency between the automotive press and the status quo in Detroit. For years the press has been both enabler and beneficiary of Detroit's worst habits. This shows no sign of abating. Consider the repeated statement that "Ford does not have a reputation for quality like Toyota" used as a supporting argument for attacks on the allegedly bland styling of the Five Hundred. The sentiment lurking below that statement, the sentiment that is odious, that is all but spoken is, "Ford does not have a reputation for quality and it is, therefore, pointless to try for one."

The press sneers at Ford's attempt to build a car which is designed to sell based on perceived quality and value. The Korean car companies achieved major strides in the market by building cars that looked like quality automobiles, that were not exciting, that were not highly styled, that simply looked and felt like good solid cars, but according to many in the media, that formula can't work for Ford.

Watching the press pounce on Ford as it tries get its act together is like watching the codependent wife of an alcoholic ridicule his attempts to clean up because he is not immediately the equal of his sober, responsible neighbors.

That is not to say the press should just roll over and take everything that Ford says about ongoing platform investment, emphasis on actual and perceived quality, and environmental issues at face value. However, the press as a whole has heaped contempt on Ford's hybrid program&emdash;at the expense of honest and objective reporting. They have lambasted Ford for creating a vehicle, the Five Hundred, that makes no pretensions to style or performance, only quality and value. Then they've laughed off Ford's statement that ongoing investment in the Five Hundred is not in response to "lukewarm" reception by the press. Such uncompromising cynicism has no place in journalism.

I have a feeling many in the press like things the way they are now. They assign themselves a God's eye view of the situation, and answer to no one. I'm sure many also assume they know more about the industry than the people that are actually in it. Furthermore, the press has an audience at the Big Three that has been only too happy to give them what they want. They wanted more profit per vehicle? Well Ford, GM, and Chrysler delivered, and their quality collapsed even as their products fell behind the times. The press wants "style" and "excitement"? Well, GM has delivered, in the form of halo vehicles that do next to nothing for the bottom line, and which do not make their mainstream offerings any better.

Looking for quality writing in the automotive press is like digging for food in a dumpster. There are good writers out there, and I do have my favorites, but they are oases in a desert, islands in a sea of sewage, people that have earned my respect, and who earn their pay. But by and large, coverage of the automotive industry remains biased, capricious, subject to preconceptions, inaccurate, and there simply is no accountability to be found anywhere.

The automotive press will not escape the ultimate consequences of their irresponsibility. Disdain from the very opinion makers they seek to influence, and irrelevance to the industry will be the reward for their ongoing advocacy of the worst in business practices."

New Camaro = D.O.A.??

GM pulls plug on '08 line of cars - Product czar Bob Lutz wants to
speed new trucks, SUVs to market faster.
http://www.detnews.com/2005/autosinsider/0.../A01-123402.htm

If the Zeta program is dead, that means the new Camaro/GTO is pretty much dead. Boy those guys at GM are idiots....

McCall