STL : National ?
- Thread starter TStiles
- Start date
Bump.
If you have an opinion on Super touring Light going National - pro or con - now's the time to talk. It is vitally important that you make your opinion known to your Board of Directors representative:
http://www.scca.com/about/?cid=44417
Email, call, or write them, let them know. Do it now!
GA
I believe Super Touring Light would be a great addition to SCCA's National racing program.
- Cars come from one of the fast-growing, and ever-popular segment of the automotive population.
- There are tons of these cars out here, and they're very popular with the younger crowd.
- Allows a large segment of the existing DOT tire-based racers (e.g., Improved Touring) to dip their toes in National racing.
- Gives sanctioning regions more opportunities for entries for their National race weekends, where the DOT cars are not competing against slick-tire cars.
- Once new fuel economy regs and "B Spec" cars take off in the general population, 2L cars will become "the new mid-size" cars.
In the "good old days" of World Challenge (circa 1999-2004 or so) the most popular of the two categories was Touring. This was because the cars were identifiable as "attainable" by their fans, and carried a level of modification that was, in itself, perceived as "attainable". Remember the fury over Roger Foo, "the every man like you and me," winning that Touring Car race at Laguna Seca in 2001 and what excitement it caused? Anyone remember who won Mosport or Road America?
That's Super Touring Light.
And even World Challenge has tacitly admitted as such; it wasn't too soon after that WCT "went off the rails" and started allowing sequential transmissions, custom-fabbed manifolds, significant suspension pickup relocation, big engine mods, and costs skyrocketed. What didn't skyrocket along with it was audience interest: while the cars became more like British Touring Cars (remember the failed North American Touring Car series?) they were no longer something that Dave and Kai could potentially participate in (regardless whether they actually would or not). To resolve this, World Challenge renamed the modified monsters GTS and created a new Touring class...made of every day attainable cars with every day attainable mods. Guess in which of its three classes World Challenge is seeing the most growth...?
That's Super Touring Light.
Support bringing STL into the National racing program.
If you have an opinion on Super touring Light going National - pro or con - now's the time to talk. It is vitally important that you make your opinion known to your Board of Directors representative:
http://www.scca.com/about/?cid=44417
Email, call, or write them, let them know. Do it now!
GA
I believe Super Touring Light would be a great addition to SCCA's National racing program.
- Cars come from one of the fast-growing, and ever-popular segment of the automotive population.
- There are tons of these cars out here, and they're very popular with the younger crowd.
- Allows a large segment of the existing DOT tire-based racers (e.g., Improved Touring) to dip their toes in National racing.
- Gives sanctioning regions more opportunities for entries for their National race weekends, where the DOT cars are not competing against slick-tire cars.
- Once new fuel economy regs and "B Spec" cars take off in the general population, 2L cars will become "the new mid-size" cars.
In the "good old days" of World Challenge (circa 1999-2004 or so) the most popular of the two categories was Touring. This was because the cars were identifiable as "attainable" by their fans, and carried a level of modification that was, in itself, perceived as "attainable". Remember the fury over Roger Foo, "the every man like you and me," winning that Touring Car race at Laguna Seca in 2001 and what excitement it caused? Anyone remember who won Mosport or Road America?
That's Super Touring Light.
And even World Challenge has tacitly admitted as such; it wasn't too soon after that WCT "went off the rails" and started allowing sequential transmissions, custom-fabbed manifolds, significant suspension pickup relocation, big engine mods, and costs skyrocketed. What didn't skyrocket along with it was audience interest: while the cars became more like British Touring Cars (remember the failed North American Touring Car series?) they were no longer something that Dave and Kai could potentially participate in (regardless whether they actually would or not). To resolve this, World Challenge renamed the modified monsters GTS and created a new Touring class...made of every day attainable cars with every day attainable mods. Guess in which of its three classes World Challenge is seeing the most growth...?
That's Super Touring Light.
Support bringing STL into the National racing program.
Greg, keep in mind that it was after the turn of the century that things went off the rails as SCCA Pro decided it wanted a diversity of cars in the fields and also started courting the manufacturers (i.e. certain black 4 door sedans that everyone at the time decried allowing in with the allowed mods). To equalize the field some, they picked a benchmark car and allowed everyone else to either mod the h3ll out of their pigs ear or artificially slowdown their gazelle to equalize the cars. That is why some cars like mine have a bunch of mods that don't fit within the spirit of STU any longer.
I also think that the growth of the Touring class has to do with the general lack of free discretionary income and available sponsor $$$$. For example, look at the rapid growth of B-Spec. Every Pro Sedan Series and sanctioning body will have a class soon for those cars. Cheap and easy to build and still mostly street legal in a pinch.
Eric
I also think that the growth of the Touring class has to do with the general lack of free discretionary income and available sponsor $$$$. For example, look at the rapid growth of B-Spec. Every Pro Sedan Series and sanctioning body will have a class soon for those cars. Cheap and easy to build and still mostly street legal in a pinch.
Eric
My letter in opposition to STL as a national class was supposed to be withdrawn. FWIW, I have reversed my opinion and support STL as a National Class..
-Eric Heinrich
One last plea....tomorrow the SCCA Board of Directors meets, and one of their agenda items is a discussion of Super Touring Light as a National class to supplement its National brethren Super Touring Under and Over. This move has strong support from the Club Racing Board.
Please write to your BoD rep supporting STL as a National class for 2012.
Greg
Please write to your BoD rep supporting STL as a National class for 2012.
Greg
Andy Bettencourt
Super Moderator
I fully support new concepts in classing and I think STL could work. But take away the SM double dippers and you don't have squat. I hope I don't see any STL supporters bashing any other classes that have no real subscription.
dhardison
New member
Email sent to our area 4 director in support of STL as a National class.
x2
x3. This is exactly what I'm hearing from others, which is why I'm not worried about the whole "double dippers" argument; I see it as a red herring. It's just a "gut feel" from talking to others, but I get the impression that this class will explode once it goes National, but absent National status it will remain, really, just as a place for double dippers.
I'm actually pretty dismayed to see the "2.5 rule" go away; I think the concept is actually a good thing for the Club overall, forcing our leaders to accept a pre-determined, non-political result (if we only had the cojones to follow through). The only problem I see with it is that it doesn't allow Regional Only classes to compete for that rule on the same playing field.
I have actually suggested to the CRB and some BoD members that all classes* be given "National Status", and the 2.5 rule be used to decide who goes to the Runoffs**.
We'll see what happens tomorrow.
GA
* Unfortunately, this does not include Improved Touring. I say this NOT because I don't want to see IT go National -- I've actually been a passive supporter of that idea(l) from the start - but because various factions, both within IT and without, do not want IT National, period. My arguments for "all classes" are limited to those that wish to have National status but do not purely due to participation numbers.
** For STL specifically, I suggested that this class could be used used as the initial entry for this idea: make it National, let it run the National program without a guarantee for a Runoffs berth, and for the first year or two of eligibility the top STL competitors could be invited to the Runoffs as grid fillers for STU as an exhibition class. No guarantee you'll get a berth, but if there's some spots left over in the STU group - which will have its own group in 2012 - then STL guys can show up. From there on STL would be on-par with the rest of the organization, succeeding or failing purely on its participation numbers.
This same idea could be used for any other class/category looking to go National. Don't know if that got any traction...
Butch Kummer
New member
A month ago I sent a note to the entire BoD stating my support for STL getting National status and received a response from the Chairman saying (and I paraphrase), "The BoD is VERY reluctant to add any new National classes at this time."
I've said this before, but as a race organizer I don't care nearly as much about number of classes as I do the number of run groups. If somebody comes to me saying they want a Spec Yugo class (see ITT) I'm all for it if they have at least two buddies that are willing to race as well.
I hear all the time about "we keep adding classes so everyone gets a trophy" but I don't buy that. If you really look at the various classes (beyond lap times) you'll see very different philosophies behind each one. FE, FC, and FM all run similar lap times and are all open-wheel cars, but (a) they achieve them in different ways and (b) they appeal to different types of customers. If we combine those three into one class we run the very real risk of having half the entries we currently have because folks find different outlets for their passion.
Bottom line - STL gives those that want to run their IT cars at the Run-Ons a chance to do so plus gets rid of some of the "gotchas" that might be keeping people out of IT today. Getting more people on the race track is never a bad thing...
I've said this before, but as a race organizer I don't care nearly as much about number of classes as I do the number of run groups. If somebody comes to me saying they want a Spec Yugo class (see ITT) I'm all for it if they have at least two buddies that are willing to race as well.
I hear all the time about "we keep adding classes so everyone gets a trophy" but I don't buy that. If you really look at the various classes (beyond lap times) you'll see very different philosophies behind each one. FE, FC, and FM all run similar lap times and are all open-wheel cars, but (a) they achieve them in different ways and (b) they appeal to different types of customers. If we combine those three into one class we run the very real risk of having half the entries we currently have because folks find different outlets for their passion.
Bottom line - STL gives those that want to run their IT cars at the Run-Ons a chance to do so plus gets rid of some of the "gotchas" that might be keeping people out of IT today. Getting more people on the race track is never a bad thing...
Matt93SE
New member
Exactly.. If STL goes national, the first couple of years are going to be double-dippers, just like STU. STU's cars are now built for the class with a very few IT and SM cars double dipping. The first year or so, it was a different story.
When STL goes national , I'll just remove the ITA stickers and replace with STL.
As the class develops , I'll do the development to present a proper STL car.
Uuuhhh...hey NORRIS, you a spambot? No? Then reply to me what class comes between ITA and ITC, not only in letters but in total awesomositation?
http://www.improvedtouring.com/forums/showthread.php?t=29951
GA, finger quivering over the "ban spammer" button...
Greg.
It's ITR....... No! It's ITS........ Wait ITB........ That's it ITB....... That's my final answer. I got it with no help from a friend!!
Just because I post a funny Youtube(Robert and I think it's funny anyway) about the topic being discussed, does that make me a Spambot?
It's not like I've never posted or I'm selling you ways to make your penis, breasts or mortgage bigger.
Please don't turf me........... I'll behave.............Honest
It's ITR....... No! It's ITS........ Wait ITB........ That's it ITB....... That's my final answer. I got it with no help from a friend!!
Just because I post a funny Youtube(Robert and I think it's funny anyway) about the topic being discussed, does that make me a Spambot?
It's not like I've never posted or I'm selling you ways to make your penis, breasts or mortgage bigger.
Please don't turf me........... I'll behave.............Honest
No, in that post above you wrote "I'm surprised I haven't seen this pop up yet" when you yourself posted that same video in another thread, saying "it was only a matter of time" (see the link I put above.)
Also, notice the smiley face...?
You must be getting old.
GA