National Class

Actually Andy, I'd say that considering the participants, this is anything but an argument, at least compared to past history. This is a spirited discussion at worst, LOL. I haven't heard either tell the other to take a Solex and shove it where the sun doesn't shine once!
 
tnord said:
Drago -Stewart Engines iirc (http://classifieds.specmiata.com/detail.php?id=2252)
Pombo - Rossini

haven't even bothered to count who else in the top 10 had what.

i don't think we've had a 25 car ITA field around here since i started. the last race i ran, and won, was 14 iirc, and i think i won an ITA race with 17 as well in my old SM. is there tougher competition in 8 car fields elsewhere? probably. but that's a whole nother issue.

i was sitting outside turn one at that T1 race, where Lux (who was leading iirc) got a flat, Heinricy was taken out, and there was another significant incident right in front of me. i think 5 of the top 6 DNF'd or something like that.
Click to expand...

Those look to more like $6k engines if you have to start w/ a crate motor, or $5k+ and your good core.

t "I just make this shit up" nord said:
yes. i feel a greater sense of accomplishment when i beat 25 people rather than 5. but you're probably one of "those guys" who feels like a winner in a 2 car field.
Click to expand...

Not sure which T1 race you were watching, but I was talking about the '01 T1 race at M-O where Heinricy lapped the entire field, in the wet, when T1 was pretty much spec corvette.
 
JeffYoung said:
I am about as anti IT going national as they come. This I would agree with. Do away with the distinction all together (which gets rid of the one big problem I see on having IT go national and that is the dilution of regional fields) and I support it. Hell, I might even make the trek to RAmerica one year if they do it right -- top twenty classes go to the RuleOffs.
Click to expand...
Exactly here. Instead of having a "regionals" and "nationals" split, you just have a ton of SCCA classes. Top 20 classes go to the RubOffs and bam, done. Maybe as Greg said, you could do a few more and combine groups, split starts, etc.

I personally want to run the Runoffs, I want to race in the "top amateur" class, its just that none of the SCCA "national" classes fit me and what I want to do to a car. I tried SSC, not fun for me, I tried T2, great idea, but was a bad time in my life, too young, to spend so much $$ so it didn't happen.

I would also support SSB and SSC going away and getting turned into T4 T5 or something, then I'd go that route. Right now, none of the T2 or T3 cars excite/inspire me enough to sell my ITA car and go there. Hell, SM is actually one way I've been leaning :)

-Tom
 
Last edited:
What would be the difference between SSB and SSC vs T5 &T5 beyond a name change? (I'm not familair with the rules differences if there are many.)
 
T allows a bunch of things that are not allowed in SS. The most significant ones would be shocks/struts and diffs.

This proposal was shot down by the membership (and loudly) 3 years ago, due to, among other things, the perceived costs of the allowed mods.
 
Meanwhile SSB and SSC are way struggling with car counts. I can totally see how the current SSC guys are arguing against it though. That truly is "rules creep" in that you'd need to drop $5k to keep your car competitive. Oh well.

But Josh nailed it, you don't have to drive a stock suspensioned race car, which in my mind, was fun, but for a few laps, and then sucked :shrug:
 
Hoppe leaning towards SM................watch it that's what happened to Tiger, he leaned that direction and got hooked on it!:D Hoppe you would be my favorite SE SM driver, the shitstorm you would keep stirred up would be worth the price of admission! Please give it serious consideration. You in there raising a storm with those guys from Florida and at RAtlanta, it is upthere on my list with a sequel for "THE HANGOVER".
Do IT!:023:
 
Tom
Read the 2010 SSB rules for Miatas.
It's an SM car with no restrictor, open tires and less weight.
but, shhhhh don't tell anyone!:D
 
JoshS said:
T allows a bunch of things that are not allowed in SS. The most significant ones would be shocks/struts and diffs.

This proposal was shot down by the membership (and loudly) 3 years ago, due to, among other things, the perceived costs of the allowed mods.
Click to expand...

Actually Josh, it was shot down by the mfg's. They threatened to pull support for racers running their cars if the SCCA turned SSB and SSC into T4 and T5. There was a letter circulating that was signed by several of the mfg reps that pretty much stated that (I may still have a copy of it somewhere). The CRB pulled the recommendation.
 
That was actually a slightly different proposal. The first time around it was just to turn SSB/SSC into T4/T5 as was mentioned here, and the SS drivers couldn't stomach the costs. But the one the manufacter's responded to also included merging SSB into T3 with some slower cars going to T4 with SSC. The manufacturers nixed that with excuses like "We don't want our MX-5 competing against our RX-8."

EDIT: Upon reflection, I think it was all at once. It was primarily the SSC drivers that didn't want the T allowances, and the manufacturers that didn't want SSB and T3 to be combined.
 
Last edited:
Josh, My memory on all the details is a bit fuzzy. I believe that you are correct. They were going to move some of the SSB cars into T3, and the rest of them, along w/ the SSC cars were going to be called T4. I don't think there was a T5 in the mix. Bottom line though, the mfg's definitely scuttled the idea. And they obviously swung a big enough stick that it made the CRB pull the proposal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top