GRM April 2004 - Starting Line Article...

Banzai240

Banzai240

New member
Just received my new GRM... Kind of an eye opening article on page 6 that gives a good idea of the perception of the SCCA that we really need to change...

http://home.comcast.net/~djjordan/Web/grm_...line_030504.pdf

------------------
Darin E. Jordan
SCCA #273080, OR/NW Regions
Renton, WA
ITS '97 240SX
DJ_AV1.jpg


[This message has been edited by Banzai240 (edited March 06, 2004).]

[This message has been edited by Banzai240 (edited March 06, 2004).]
 
Darin,

Just what parts of that 'perception' do we need to change? The one about the 'overly serious nature of rules enforcement'?

------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI (sold) | MARRS #25 HProd Rabbit
SCCA 279608
 
Originally posted by Bill Miller:
The one about the 'overly serious nature of rules enforcement'?
Click to expand...

Bill, David...

They were referring directly to PRODUCTION when they made that comment... You know, the place where everyone seems to believe the grass is so much greener...
rolleyes.gif




------------------
Darin E. Jordan
SCCA #273080, OR/NW Regions
Renton, WA
ITS '97 240SX
DJ_AV1.jpg
 
You know Darin, I thought maybe, just maybe, you would take the opportunity to explain your position w/o taking shots at someone. Obviously I was wrong. And if you've got such a dim view of Production, why the hell do you spend so much time on the Prod board? In fact, you posted essentially this same thread over there. What kind of smart-assed answer would you have come up w/ had I posed the question over there?

I guess you just can't help yourself, can you?

------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI (sold) | MARRS #25 HProd Rabbit
SCCA 279608
 
"Set you up"?? Spare me the melodrama. Why couldn't you just answer the question from the outset? No, you have to grandstand, and make a big production out of it. Anyway, I've learned one thing from this recent exchange. I have no reason to ask you anymore questions, because your opinion is irrelevant (to me), and I could give a rat's ass how you feel about things. Now, you can go back to saving the SCCA.

BTW, I'm pretty sure that GRM article is copyrighted.

------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI (sold) | MARRS #25 HProd Rabbit
SCCA 279608
 
Originally posted by Bill Miller:
BTW, I'm pretty sure that GRM article is copyrighted.
Click to expand...

I'll remember that if I ever decide I want to try to use it for anything important...

Bill.. If I thought you were really interested in my answer, I'd answer your questions from the outset... But you've shown OVER and OVER again, when I have answered your questions, that all you are interested in is baiting me into a position where you can, as you've done here, simply attack me and try to discredit me. It has been a conscious effort of late for me to AVOID answering your questions directly.

To the rest here... Sorry. Bill is right... I should just keep my mouth shut. I thought it was important for people to be informed about how others in racing view the SCCA... My bad for even bringing it up...



------------------
Darin E. Jordan
SCCA #273080, OR/NW Regions
Renton, WA
ITS '97 240SX
DJ_AV1.jpg
 
The interesting point in that article is that what some people perceive as the SCCA's greatest strengths (consistency and loyalty to its history and participants) are seen by others to be its greatest weakness - resistance to change.

It's a little like the two-party system in US politics: It's either "bad" because nothing changes, or "good" because nothing changes, depending completely on whose values are applied to the analysis.

To my mind, the real problem might be that SCCA plays around the edges of reform, tossing in fringe programs that are contrary to the core philosophies of its racing programs - Speed Freakz, 125 shifter karts in SoloII, and the spec classes underwritten by manufacturer corporate support.

These programs don't have much staying power and leave a bizarre scattering of racing detritus that the club has to deal with, since it is established-member-responsive.

K
 
Interesting how folks see different things in the article. I noted the difference in the SCCA's "Learn how to drive somewhere else ('cause we won't help you), and race in our classes or don't race" and NASA's(GRM's example) "We'll teach you to drive, and if you can get enough cars together, you can have your own race class." philosophies.

Also noted that the 'stodgy' SCCA's rules are pretty much the standard for racing.
 
Darin,

I find it interesting that you've made a concious effort to avoid answering my questions directly, but you still seem to have no problem taking shots at me. Pretty much becomes a self-fulling prophacey that someone will 'attack' [sic] you if you take unprovoked shots at them.

------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI (sold) | MARRS #25 HProd Rabbit
SCCA 279608
 
Originally posted by Bill Miller:
... but you still seem to have no problem taking shots at me.
Click to expand...

I'll let you have the last word here Bill...

Rather than drag this out here in public, please e-mail me with a list of the "shots" I've taken at you, and I'll come back here and publically appologize for each one that warrants it...

No sense in wasting everyone elses time here with our personal feud...

Again, my appologies to everyone else for this exchange...


------------------
Darin E. Jordan
SCCA #273080, OR/NW Regions
Renton, WA
ITS '97 240SX
DJ_AV1.jpg


[This message has been edited by Banzai240 (edited March 07, 2004).]

[This message has been edited by Banzai240 (edited March 07, 2004).]
 
Interesting aspect of the "we won't teach you to drive" issue...

I've now done SCCA licensing schools almost 20 years apart (yeesh) and I was VERY interested to note that a vast majority of the people at the 2004 version had LOTS of on-track experience - BMWCCA, PCA, Car Guys, NASA, and the various "pro" schools.

When I did the 1986 version, almost none of my classmates had been on a race track. The concept of an apex was absolutely foreign to a vast majority of them.

The one constant was that the nature of instruction was pretty much the same, accepting that in all cases it is pretty much person-dependent. I had a great instructor (Jeff Grove) at Roebling Rd. last month and he provided a lot of feedback but the format of an SCCA school precludes the kind of direct instruction that most of the other organizations provide.

K
 
<font face=\"Verdana, Arial\" size=\"2\">Originally posted by GRMPer:</font>
Click to expand...

Hey, it's Per from Grassroots Motorsports! What are you doing here? This isn't the Drifting Forums, you know.

Ha. I make joke.

Really though, I've been meaning to write to you guys about featuring more IT cars in GRM. I can only remember two in the past 5 years or so. And one of those articles was more focused on the driver. Not that I'm complaining, I love your mag and read every issue. I even have an AutoX lying around somewhere.

Uh, sorry for thread hijack...
 
I've been involved with SCCA, NASA, BMWCCA and PCA at various times over the past 10ish years. I've even been an "insider" with both NASA and SCCA holding board and director positions with both. So I'm fairly qualified to give my opinions on this matter.

Please note the word "opinion" before you read further.

What the SCCA has in common with the other groups is pretty simple... Cars. Thats about it.

NASA, PCA and BMWCCA have alot of similarities, so I'll direct my thoughts toward NASA since thats where most of my experience lands outside of SCCA.

The Benefits of NASA...
Very open, very modern, very hip, very "now." Lots of flexibility when it comes to car classing and new ideas. Youth, youth, and more youth.

The downside to NASA...
Not nearly as well organized (I know of situations where drivers have done race weekends having never gone through registration or presenting a comp license to anyone). The rules enforcement and tech inspection can be almost non-existent (air bags deploying in a car during a race). There is little to no worker training in many cases. And finally, NASA is a for profit organization. Any money made at events is pocketed by the organizers. Because of this you see some decisions made for the wrong reasons (Too many groups or entrants in a weekend, Spec tire deals made without proper member input, etc.)

The Benefits of SCCA...
The first, most established, and still the best. Basically, the SCCA has its shit together on all fronts. I know it doesn't seem this way sometimes, but if you spend some time with other groups you'll very likely end up coming back *home*.
Our Regional Club Racing weekends are run as professionally as Pro racing events, because in many cases its the same people in charge. Workers are trained and experienced, and tech inspectors (for the most part) know what they're looking at/for.
No, it isn't perfect and it'll never make everyone happy, but as soon as any of you guys figure out how to make EVERYONE happy, you be sure to let me know.

The Downside to SCCA...
Politics, politics, politics. I'm not sure how you could ever get away from this in any member driven environment. As Kirk mentioned above, its one of those things that makes the club great and makes it frustrating as hell all at the same time. I will say though that I have seen vast improvement in communication and customer service in the past few years, and hope it continues.

Scott, who when it comes to SCCA says "It ain't perfect, but its the best game in town baby."
 
Originally posted by Catch22:
I will say though that I have seen vast improvement in communication and customer service in the past few years, and hope it continues.
Click to expand...

I think full credit goes to Steve Johnson. I'm a believer. I keep seeing good things down the road for the SCCA.


------------------
George Roffe
Houston, TX
84 944 ITS car under construction
92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
http://www.nissport.com
 
Well, George, I think that you may be selling yourself and your brethren short.

I see a new level (and I've been saying this for a while now, go back and check some threads) of communication and open mindedness from the ITAC, the PAC and the CRB.

I think it makes a huge difference. I know that you point out that this board is only the tip of the iceberg of IT drivers, but when you guys from the ITAC communicate here, it travels down the line.

So, credit where credit is due. To you, and the guys on the ITAC and CRB who post and lurk here.

------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]
 
Per...

Sorry about the copyright thing... I'll think next time before I post...
wink.gif


BUT, you'll notice in this months Fastrack, that the little snippet about the Neons can now be (well, pending a disaster during the August BoD voting...
eek.gif
) checked off!

Stay tuned for what hopefully will amount to a few more tidbits that should secure IT's place in the SCCA for some time to come...
biggrin.gif


------------------
Darin E. Jordan
SCCA #273080, OR/NW Regions
Renton, WA
ITS '97 240SX
DJ_AV1.jpg
 
Several of the complaints I hear against the SCCA are in my mind totally bogus.

#1. New classes. If you want to start a brand new class, it is very easy in most regions. Talk to the race board, tell them what you want to do, and then do it. Most regions want more entries, and if they can find a place to put your car, they will. On the otherhand, if you are a smart ass and just show up with a car expecting to be allowed to race, most regions will tell you to pack it up buddie.

#2. Rules enforcment. I personally think the SCCA is LAX in rules inforcement. I belive Every group at Every race should be checked for something (other than weight) Every weekend. Not enough tech people? Fine, hook two competitiors up to check each others car. Start looking at things. Lets do everything we can to reduce the perception and reality of cheating.

#3. I am unaware of any new national spec classes that were created by the SCCA due to manufacture influence. I know that some regional classes were created that way. Besides, how can that be a weakness for the SCCA and then be a strength for NASA? Get real. I think the BOD/CRB should have the power to create a regional class with the waive of a wand. But I think that national classes MUST follow a logical progression.

Alan
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top