New IT class revealed at National Convention

TStiles said:
I sure hope ChumpCar is open to development of some rules , I suggested to Joey a few years ago that they might want to take a look at NASA PT classing in an attempt to establish what cars can and can't compete and potential class distinctions.

I left the discussion with the impression that they really like the way the system was working ( who wouldn't with the number of entries ) and they were not open to classing or making the rules less ambiguous.

I concluded that without a clearer ruleset , I would park my plans to build a car and just run a few races with buddies ( in their cars ) until it all sorted out. We're doing the 24 @ TWS next month , but that will likely be my last race because the car we have just can't cut it anymore.

I would find the ChumpCar series very appealing with either PT or IT ruleset.
Click to expand...

Is this thread still going?!?

But I agree with mogren and Tstiles about Chumpcar needing some clearer prep and classing rules. It's getting frustrating trying to hang with an equal or better driver in an E36 BMW 325 when all I have to work with is a 1.6 liter Miata.

Mogren, why limit tire width instead of an over/under displacement rule like Super Touring? It seams like that would just make driving the heavy/powerful cars less enjoyable.
 
TStiles said:
I sure hope ChumpCar is open to development of some rules , I suggested to Joey a few years ago that they might want to take a look at NASA PT classing in an attempt to establish what cars can and can't compete and potential class distinctions.

I left the discussion with the impression that they really like the way the system was working ( who wouldn't with the number of entries ) and they were not open to classing or making the rules less ambiguous.

I concluded that without a clearer ruleset , I would park my plans to build a car and just run a few races with buddies ( in their cars ) until it all sorted out. We're doing the 24 @ TWS next month , but that will likely be my last race because the car we have just can't cut it anymore.

I would find the ChumpCar series very appealing with either PT or IT ruleset.
Click to expand...

But Chump with IT rules would be IT, wouldn't it?

And with the cost containment and penalty laps schemes in place, how is it possible that a car "just can't cut it anymore?"

K
 
Knestis said:
And with the cost containment and penalty laps schemes in place, how is it possible that a car "just can't cut it anymore?"

K
Click to expand...

Easy , Our car owner/builder loves the old Celica. So he built and continues to develop a 1975 Celica. Last spring we ran a perfect race in one of the 7 hr races. Finished 4th , but our best lap time is about 6 seconds a lap off the leaders best laps.

Not sure I agree with the cost containment assumption. Our owner has spent a ton on the Celica , but it's still a rolling turd.

Without clear rules , guys continue to push the envelop and render the older cars non competitive. How about a 2nd Gen RX7 with a SHO motor that gets no penalty laps ? How about an absolute bone stock 1.6 miata with no laps ? No way a true crap can can be competitive.

I'm OK with it , ( I just join the team as a diversion / fun weekend ) just think Chump could retain more competitors by better definition of the rules and adding a few classes.
 
The cost containment is out. There is very little real cost containment. The AIV rule has made it into a craiglist/desk jockey race . each team has a AIV guy thatcall day cruises for adds and make up their own ads. total BS.
It should go back to actual cost,IMHO. Or a few hard rules to keep the cost/ return in check. The front running cars are as well prepped as any front running IT car or prod car. Not as pretty , but evry thing in the car has been looked at for weight, speed, and durability .

As for the 205 tire size recommendation; The big, heavy, fast, cars will slow down and be less inviting. The lighter cars will have a better PSI loading and have a better chance.
I am working on my power per pound , as we go on. The car is getting lighter and cleaner , the engine is sneaking up on power. It has a better engine than My Hp car, and is 200# lighter. I use a taller gear box to reduce the 5th gear time. The little 5 th gearis small and breaks, 3/4 works well but might give away some lap times.The drivers shift better 3-4 than 3,4,5. also. Daytona and Road Atlanta will need 5th gear, Sebring does not.
I am filling in the front end grille area, lowering the hood angle, cutting the windshield, removing the tail lights, flairing the interior panels. etc. Taping the seams.

You still need 4 drivers that can drive it fast and gently.
 
TStiles said:
Easy , Our car owner/builder loves the old Celica. So he built and continues to develop a 1975 Celica. Last spring we ran a perfect race in one of the 7 hr races. Finished 4th , but our best lap time is about 6 seconds a lap off the leaders best laps.

Not sure I agree with the cost containment assumption. Our owner has spent a ton on the Celica , but it's still a rolling turd.

Without clear rules , guys continue to push the envelop and render the older cars non competitive. How about a 2nd Gen RX7 with a SHO motor that gets no penalty laps ? How about an absolute bone stock 1.6 miata with no laps ? No way a true crap can can be competitive.

I'm OK with it , ( I just join the team as a diversion / fun weekend ) just think Chump could retain more competitors by better definition of the rules and adding a few classes.
Click to expand...

Kirks point is that in the real world, after time, popularity adds cost. Want to run around and don't care about winning? Thats easy, and cheap. Want to win? No problem, as long as nobody else does either. BUT, once a crafty, and well funded competitor decides the prize is worth spending ....it's all up to the bank account.

Look at the post from Micheal...he's building the engine for more power, hes doing a LOT of work on the car...changing the hood angle, shortening the windshield...changing transmissions. Yea, he might be doing that work himself, ('containing cost') but ther's nothing stopping others from paying for that.....and saying they did it themselves.


As far as the 'flexible rules", (penalty laps, etc) thats another term for 'favoritism'.
Ever heard the term, "Jumped the shark"?
 
A Chumpcar got a logbook here in FL @ daytona registered in ITO. Ran some 2:32 laps.
Funny, when I take my old Chumper out in any CFR events the tech guy says it will nevvver get a log book. maybe we need a new tech guy? or SCCA has to step back and see how to treat todays racers.
Remember that many of these drivers/car builders have been down that 12000$ IT car thing and 40,000$ prod class and have gotten smarter( or reprioritized) over the years.
 
Flyinglizard said:
A Chumpcar got a logbook here in FL @ daytona registered in ITO. Ran some 2:32 laps.
Funny, when I take my old Chumper out in any CFR events the tech guy says it will nevvver get a log book. maybe we need a new tech guy? or SCCA has to step back and see how to treat todays racers.
Remember that many of these drivers/car builders have been down that 12000$ IT car thing and 40,000$ prod class and have gotten smarter( or reprioritized) over the years.
Click to expand...

I assume tech is saying your car will not pass SCCA tech because it doesn't meet the rules?. Tech inspectors have a reponsiblity to ensure the cars are safe and meet the rules. This is a dangerous sport and people can get hurt, even die. It's not fair to ask a tech inspector pass a car that's not safe and be responsible for someone getting hurt.

If you are saying you want to present your Chumpcar as is, without making an effort to meet the actual rules, then yes, it won't pass tech and it shouldn't pass tech. But if you are presenting a car that meets the rules and happens to also be a chumpcar then it damn well better pass tech.

In my experience SCCA as a whole is filled with fair, friendly people who are out to have a good time and put on safe and fair races. Sure, there is the occasioinal jerk, but I've never been a part of any organization that doesn't have an odd personality or two. That's the way the world is and I don't believe that lemons and chump are magical exceptions to the ahole rule.
 
My Chumper has a lot more cage and cage mounting points,than IT rules. It passes SCCA safety rules, easily.
It will not pass the clean/neat/ uncrashed rule. it is neat and clean but has run about 70 ovaltrack races and gathered some "love" along the way. The crush areas are fine.

The roof has been cut off. It has louvres in the hood ,The tail lights are cage mounted. The battery is floor mounted /covered. It has the air dam/splitter/ nose . it weighs about 1780 plus driver.
CFR tech ,has been not fun. I avoid them when I can.
WE also run the HP VW Rocco, SM, ITB cars. Tech stays consistant and a PITA.
"Rick" has been pretty nice most of the time, allowing the Chumper for schools maybe 2 times.
MM
 
Last edited:
When I get through the 14hrs of Daytona( 3 cars, 8 drivers for us, 85cars entered) with Chumpcar, I will look at starting the class here in CFR.
As I say, if you are not part of the solution, you are part of the problem. I will try to be part of the solution.
I do want to keep all of the cars on the 205 tires for a soft parity control.
MM
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top