Huge ST reorg - write your letters!
 

tl;dr your letters are needed to seal the deal, and it's not a foregone conclusion

This month's Fastrack just dropped a big proposal for ST. https://cdn.connectsites.net/user_fi...pdf?1719237947

The major proposal here is to create a new ST class, and move the ND (plus a bunch of cars slower than the ND) into it. This frees up STR for the NC Miata and the 2nd gen twin to be competitive.

This is obviously great news for 2nd gen twins owners. But I'd also posit that it's good news for 1st gen twins as well, because if this proposal fails, the STAC would have tough choices to make, and might choose to combine both gens into the same class.

And I don't think it's a given this proposal will pass. We all know Solo has a problem with too many classes, and here we are adding a new one. I have already seen considerable grumbling in other forums; for people who are not immediately benefiting from this, the proposal in controversial and will attract some letters in opposition.

Here's a really simple form letter to register your support. You can submit it at https://crbscca.com/.



Re: #36154 ST class updates

Dear STAC,

I support the proposal in its entirety. Thank you.

I think it's a good proposal and had a good chance of going forward. The reason is that it aligns ST with the way the rest of the classes function. Having your car follow a path like DS > DST > DSP > DP > DM makes way more sense than the classing system does right now. I'm not saying that's how this is going to play out but if they do it then it has a chance like that.

IMO, the too many classes complaint is just short for "too many classes that don't make sense to the average driver". The class structure is way better than lumping cars that have significant gaps in performance together in one class just to make it "easier".

My first reaction to this was "here we go again". My 2017's been moved from CS to DS. Then I went to STX this year and now I'm going to this magical DST class.

The more I think about it though, it does make sense and having the 2nd gen go to AST gets it out of STR, ND Miata owners are happy, 2nd gen owners are happy in whatever the replacement naming for STR is, and 1st gen owners are happy being dominant in STX/DST.

It does make sense you go from DS to DST, etc... however that's not fully true. Look at the 2nd gen going from DS to AST. That doesn't make much sense from a naming convention standpoint.

But I also see the issue with the 2nd gen being classed. If it gets into STX, the first gen's dominance goes away. If it's in STR, the ND is better.

Kinda goes back to something Alex Piehl and I talked about often - a car should more or less be competitive in one trim level (street, street touring, etc), but can't necessarily be competitive in all trim levels. If the 2nd gen is top dog in DS, it really shouldn't be competitive in STR. Likewise, the 1st gen isn't competitive in DS, but is to top dog in STX. As long as each car has one place to go, that's the best we can do with classing. One car can't be dominant in every class it goes to. But also having a popular car be noncompetitive in every class it's in is also lame.

Given all that, to benefit me in going to STX this year after spending 4 years in CS/DS getting romped on by the 2nd gen and CTR, I'm all for making the 2nd gen folks happy and keeping STX/DST as it is.

Bottom line though - it's almost like each car needs it's own PAX and classes as they are now just get dissolved all together. That's where we're heading with all these classes. There's too many and some local regions combine classes, but use the PAX of that car, but have a general 'street touring' class or 'street' class. This makes more sense to me. It's disappointing when you show up to an event and you're the only one in class. Even at the Cleveland tour there was one other person in STX pre-registereted and they dropped before the event. I would have been by my lonesome.... at a national event.

Getting off my soapbox now. Running DS with a 1st gen has traumatized me lol.

Our region does exactly this. Index classes. We aren't big enough to have a ton of competition in a single SCCA class but we have great competition with the index classes. It works great for us.

Cmiovino- I was the last man standing in STX for the Cleveland Tour and bailed because competing against myself wasn't worth the trip.

I'm fine if they make the change or don't.

I wonder though why they hate the poor S2K's though...

Also, you don't need to send them letters. They actually created a survey to fill out about the topic. Linked below.

https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/SoloS...1CvxlaepVQd2_A

This is very important: you need to send letters. This is how they register official for/against numbers for every proposal. Otherwise the SEB reserves the right to reject the proposal.

The STAC and the SEB are not going to use survey responses to drive the outcome of the proposal, because that's not how the proposal process works. They will use it for planning the longer term direction of the category.

Yeah. You can fill the survey and that is helpful, but 1) it doesn't really shape specific answers to these questions and 2) your impact can easily by offset by someone casually touching buttons while pooping.

Writing a letter is where your specific input will be valued.

I like this idea and it makes sense, but how would the indexing work when you start getting modified vehicles in the touring or other classes. The variety and combinations are nearly infinite.

Overall, I think the simplification and going to individual indexing would be helpful not only from a competition, but also from a recruitement standpoint. Some people seem to be baffled by the classing when they first try out autocross. When I was new, I spent hours reading through the rulebook to get it right and understand how it worked, but that's just my personality. Not everyone does that.

For the normal procedures, I agree with you.

However, I don't think they would have gone through the trouble of making the survey if they weren't going to use it's information.

This isn't a standard run of the mill change proposal, and I think they know that.

Maybe I'm not being clear enough.

The SEB has a formal process for each AC. That process revolves entirely around fastrack proposals and letter responses from members.

The letter is how you vote. If the SEB sees 20 letters in support, and 10 letters in opposition, they're much more likely to proceed with a proposal then if it's 10 for and 10 against.

The surveys are not part of the formal process. The survey does not give you a vote. The ACs are doing surveys because the SEB process is extremely limited and makes it very hard for the ACs to ask for open ended feedback.

I'm trying really hard to not "well ackshually" this. But if you rely on the survey to get your input in for this specific #36154 proposal, and you don't write a letter, your vote will not be counted with the SEB, and it's the SEB we need to convince. Letters are the only formal and officially recognized manner to support a proposal. Don't throw away your vote.