chuck baader
New member
In addition, that is what is killing BMWCCA racing and also NASA GTS series...slowly. Chuck
December 2011 Fastrack
- Thread starter Dave Gomberg
- Start date
It's inevitable - if and only if a series is successful.
Competitiveness (big fields full of teams that want to win, and have the capacity to really try) drives up the cost of running up front. People whine about NASCAR but they at least address the load of technology on those costs.
The only way to guarantee that costs to run up front will stay low, is to design classes to be unpopular and small. (See also, "elimination of SCCA's 2.5 rule.")
K
lateapex911
Super Moderator
Which has spawned a not unexpected response from the exiled G Prod guys who couldn't manage to get 2.5 cars to show up to a race:
http://prodracing.com/prodcar/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=12985
That thread should be required reading for every Club Racing participant.
I'm going to submit a request: "Please, for the sake of all that is holy, do not reinstate GP as a National class."
K
JeffYoung
New member
Seriously.
I signed into that board and typed up a post that basically said: "PLEASE take your G Prod cars and go vintage racing" but chickened out.
Wow. Talk about the scarifying future of the Club. I know someday my car goes to the scrap heap. These guys literally want to race 60 year old cars in our premier racing series......
I signed into that board and typed up a post that basically said: "PLEASE take your G Prod cars and go vintage racing" but chickened out.
Wow. Talk about the scarifying future of the Club. I know someday my car goes to the scrap heap. These guys literally want to race 60 year old cars in our premier racing series......
But the issues are bigger than that, by a long shot.
There were years when the RubOffs pole-winning times in adjacent Prod classes were smaller than the difference between first and second within a class. Cars get moved or re-spec'd based on performances against one or two other cars, at one race. And ultimately, classes that couldn't get enough entries to field a pick-up basketball team at their average event get a NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP.
And instead of fewer classes, we get more...
K
There were years when the RubOffs pole-winning times in adjacent Prod classes were smaller than the difference between first and second within a class. Cars get moved or re-spec'd based on performances against one or two other cars, at one race. And ultimately, classes that couldn't get enough entries to field a pick-up basketball team at their average event get a NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP.
And instead of fewer classes, we get more...
K
Ron Earp
Administrator
Wow, I didn't know about that. I think I was less down about the SCCA before I knew that factoid.
Can someone tell me in three sentences or less why the 2.5 average participation rule was removed?
They said it explicitly in the release: to keep Touring 3 from losing National status.
GA
EDIT: link to news item.
http://www.scca.com/news/index.cfm?cid=50874
Last edited:
Ron Earp
Administrator
So the club makes a rule, the minority affected complain, and the rule gets changed. Yay.
Harvey
New member
OMG it would be so nice if that was all there was to it.
Harvey
New member
Here ya go. I really get tired of seeing that card played. We have 2 very different organizations, chose 1.
I kinda found this interesting as well. From that news article:
"The suspension of the rule means that Touring 3, which failed to meet the 2.5 minimum over the 2010 and 2011 National Club Racing seasons, will continue as a National class..."
And then I found this:
SCCA BoD Grants T3 Reprieve, Will Compete at 2009 Runoffs
"TOPEKA, Kan. (Dec. 8, 2008) - Sports Car Club of America’s Board of Directors voted unanimously Friday to permit Touring 3 to compete at the 2009 SCCA® National Championship Runoffs®.
...
Touring 3 was first recognized as a National class in SCCA Club Racing in 2006."
http://www.scca.com/news/index.cfm?cid=45322
I really hate to pick at a sore subject, but did T3 ever make 2.5?
GA
"The suspension of the rule means that Touring 3, which failed to meet the 2.5 minimum over the 2010 and 2011 National Club Racing seasons, will continue as a National class..."
And then I found this:
SCCA BoD Grants T3 Reprieve, Will Compete at 2009 Runoffs
"TOPEKA, Kan. (Dec. 8, 2008) - Sports Car Club of America’s Board of Directors voted unanimously Friday to permit Touring 3 to compete at the 2009 SCCA® National Championship Runoffs®.
...
Touring 3 was first recognized as a National class in SCCA Club Racing in 2006."
http://www.scca.com/news/index.cfm?cid=45322
I really hate to pick at a sore subject, but did T3 ever make 2.5?
GA
JeffYoung
New member
The reality card?
The reality card is that if we continue to devise rules to make 60 year old chassis compeitive and focus on THAT instead of newer cars, cleaner rule sets and younger drivers, we are dead.
Better get used to that card. I've made my choice and it is to improve THIS organization.
The reality card is that if we continue to devise rules to make 60 year old chassis compeitive and focus on THAT instead of newer cars, cleaner rule sets and younger drivers, we are dead.
Better get used to that card. I've made my choice and it is to improve THIS organization.
Ron Earp
Administrator
I need to send them a letter about the SCCA website.
Go to www.scca.com and click "Tour Website".
Select your car and you can find out what you can do with it. Except IT doesn't figure in there for domestics.
1998 V6 Mustang - AutoX only, no road racing options
1997 V6 CAmaro - AutoX only, no road racing options
1995 V8 Mustang - Autox, Touring, and Super Touring - no mention of IT or American Sedan.
System seems to work well for imports though, Miata, 240sx, Hondas, etc.
It doesn't allow you to select anything older than 1980 either.