SCCA Solo D Street discussion

[blkwrxwag]

Originally Posted by ULLLOSE

They also seemed to work fine for Zerr who finished 3rd in STU at Natls, and won STU at the Pro finale.

Indeed they did - no argument here.

[Locust]

I replied to a lot of Mark's stuff in a separate PM but a few things for here:

- I wasn't implying that Des is not a good driver; I know he is. I race against him locally 10+ times a year.
- I'm of the opinion that the Camaro and Cadillac (when it worked / if Des' didn't break) are overdogs for the class. When you put good drivers in a good car it's tough to beat. Anyone watch F1? Think Mercedes 2016.
- We'll get a chance to truly see some back-to-back numbers because there's some kind of huge test going on soon with a bunch of BS, CS, and DS nationally competitive cars and drivers. The goal (I think?) is to class the Type-R but it will also show some good in-class numbers. I can't remember if it was mentioned in this thread or another one but it should be more accurate than the STU test I heard happened at Nationals this year on the practice course.
- The spec class seems like it throws a wrench into everything regarding DS classing because it's almost the same cost to prep for the spec class as street. I'd like to know if the SAC/SEB are considering this when they look at DS and the Type-R or are putting the spec class separate from any decisions regarding street classing.

Originally Posted by blkwrxwag

Well, in their defense, they work fine at El Toro and San Diego. I'm not sure if OPR was a factor and I should have bought tire scraping equipment, but for whatever reason, the car and I were having a fight on course and the car won

Obviously, they worked well for Bryan H. in STU.

Hey Max it was great officially meeting you at Nationals this year. Didn't realize it was you I was talking with on here last month about the Nexens. We should have had a longer conversation about them. It could have been OPR causing some of that for you. I'm bringing a tire scraping tool next year too because the amount we took off was staggering. Come to Packwood next year!

Originally Posted by ULLLOSE

They also seemed to work fine for Zerr who finished 3rd in STU at Natls, and won STU at the Pro finale.

I don't know what Heitkotter was doing to manage his Nexens but I do know that Dan and Bill have had to put a lot of effort into heat management with them. Dan was the second driver in the Pro finale on the final day and he said the tires were cooked after Bill was done.

That's about the same experience I had with them after 3 events. They're great on those first couple runs and then they get too hot very quickly. Great tire and definitely competitive but for me, personally, I scrapped them because I didn't like the extra management required.

[DaWorstPlaya]

Originally Posted by race2win

[LIST]

....
[*]Some have mentioned what "fits" in DS, or what the class philosophy is supposed to be. The idea centers around this...Fun to drive sports coupes and sedans, are DD capable and can carry a set of tires, and are semi affordable new (say less than $30K-ish new). The Camaro "fits" this image, as does the WRX, as does the Twins. The CTR certainly pushes the envelope on paper regarding cost and HP/TQ, but it fits the rest of the "image". Also remember it's wrong-wheel-drive.
...[*]The SCCA "screwed the pooch" on the ND in CS?? The ND had more cars in attendance than any other model in Street, I'd say that's a success and one to build a class around Bottom line is that Street broke another attendance record this year, I'd like to think the decisions of the SAC and SEB haven't been so bad. Also, the classing of the ND in CS was made BEFORE the exhibition runs took place in 2015, no sandbagging or black helicopters were involved. I'm 99% sure that car was on stock shocks, if you have driven one that way you would understand why it was off the pace.
[*]Classing decisions based solely on performance potential only works if the course design stays the same, otherwise you will have huge discrepancies. There is always lots of bench racing about this car being better than that one, but until you drive them back to back it's just that..."bench racing". At least one of you has had the opportunity to drive a Camaro back to back with your car

Mark,

Thanks for coming in a shedding some light on the thought process. People are always going to have their opinions. Not trying to argue vs clearing up some facts.

If memory serve me correctly Street/stock has always broken attendance year after year. I used to own a tuned car, got tired of daily driving it. I have noticed the same trend in my local events, most of the competition happens in Street classes. *SP classes are ghost towns. Several have left ST*/*SP to switch back to street in my region. Those people go to Nats and help bump up the Street numbers.

Just to clarify, the ND that was driven in 2015 Nats was built by GRM and it had BFG Rivals, MCS double shocks (100% sure) and a Progress front sway car (I think). I know because I took a good look at the car and my memory rarely fails me but I am starting to get old.

That year it was a writer from GRM and Andy Hollis that codrove the car in CS. It placed mid-pack that year. This was when CS had healthy competition with the NC Miata, RX8 and the Twins. At that point it wasn't considered the over dog.

Andy showed up the following year (2016) with an ND Miata when it was made legal for CS and was running much higher than mid pack. In the high trophies 1st day and solid trophies the 2nd day. That year CS had record attendance with 86 cars showing up and a variety of different cars. Now most of the cars except the ND have left CS.

So, the attendance for CS actually went down to 46 this year compared to 86 last year. I wouldn't define that as success.

The performance potential statement I made seems to be taken out of context. What that actually means, is test any new car against a bunch of competitive cars in a class before it is added to a class. Test it on a variety of courses and see where it is faster and slower than those cars in the class. I think we can agree, there is always going to some level of course dependency for any given vehicle.

But if it is tested on a variety of courses and found to be faster than the other cars in every single course variation then perhaps it should be moved up a class. If it is faster in some and slower in others perhaps it might be a good fit in the class. Then calculate the median and compare them. It sounds like you guys are already doing that.

Design a system where:
A-B median times = SS
B-C median times = AS
C-D median times = BS
etc

I would prefer if real world scientific testing and actual facts are being used when classing cars. This is what I mean by performance potential and why I strongly disagree with current "philosophy" of classing cars based on perceived utility. That way you could have a wagon running against a sports coupe in a class if the numbers match up. How fun would that be? But that is just my opinion.

It is what it is and I'm not a subject matter expert. Either way we are all gambling with our money and time one way or another.

Congrats on your DS victory and National Championship. Great driving both days.

Unlike that Max Hayter guy who showed up on Nexens.

[race2win]

Thanks for the kind words and well written response.


Not trying to extend the debate, but a couple things...

Originally Posted by DaWorstPlaya

If memory serve me correctly Street/stock has always broken attendance year after year. I used to own a tuned car, got tired of daily driving it. I have noticed the same trend in my local events, most of the competition happens in Street classes. *SP classes are ghost towns. Several have left ST*/*SP to switch back to street in my region. Those people go to Nats and help bump up the Street numbers.

Yes and no. Street/Stock has largely been the most popular category over history, but percentage and growth is at an all-time high. Why?? I think tires have a lot to do with it. Also technology is bringing us much faster cars so the fun factor is better than it was in the past. Making all the pieces fit in the puzzle while continuing to grow the category is the hard part, and something we work very hard on.

Just to clarify, the ND that was driven in 2015 Nats was built by GRM and it had BFG Rivals, MCS double shocks (100% sure) and a Progress front sway car (I think). I know because I took a good look at the car and my memory rarely fails me but I am starting to get old.

That year it was a writer from GRM and Andy Hollis that codrove the car in CS. It placed mid-pack that year. This was when CS had healthy competition with the NC Miata, RX8 and the Twins. At that point it wasn't considered the over dog.

Andy showed up the following year (2016) with an ND Miata when it was made legal for CS and was running much higher than mid pack. In the high trophies 1st day and solid trophies the 2nd day. That year CS had record attendance with 86 cars showing up and a variety of different cars. Now most of the cars except the ND have left CS.

I may be wrong about the shocks, are you sure that wasn't the STR car Ron Bauer drove? Either way, a couple more data-points regarding the ND in 2015-2016... The GRM/Mazda exhibition car was on Rivals when everyone else was on 71Rs (remember, the original Rival and Rival S did not like Lincoln at all). In 2016 Andy is listed as "Multi" for tires, if memory serves this was because he started on BFGs and switched to 71Rs (again like everyone else was running). Point is, there was nothing sneaky going on regarding the original classing of the car in 2015, and that the runs were taken after the announcement was made.

So, the attendance for CS actually went down to 46 this year compared to 86 last year. I wouldn't define that as success.

Very true, this is what happens when a popular car is given the option to run somewhere else potentially more competitive with just a spring and bar change (a scenario no other car in Street has the ability to do BTW). I was not calling the overall class numbers this year a success, I was implying the ND is very popular (the most popular at Nats this year) and if you are going to build a class around 1 car that is a great foundation (same as the Twins for SSC). Another thing to consider is many people (myself included) chose not to purchase an ND based on transmission failures, as that situation is getting fixed I think you are going to see many more join the CS fun.

The performance potential statement I made seems to be taken out of context. What that actually means, is test any new car against a bunch of competitive cars in a class before it is added to a class. Test it on a variety of courses and see where it is faster and slower than those cars in the class. I think we can agree, there is always going to some level of course dependency for any given vehicle.

But if it is tested on a variety of courses and found to be faster than the other cars in every single course variation then perhaps it should be moved up a class. If it is faster in some and slower in others perhaps it might be a good fit in the class. Then calculate the median and compare them. It sounds like you guys are already doing that.

Design a system where:
A-B median times = SS
B-C median times = AS
C-D median times = BS
etc

I would prefer if real world scientific testing and actual facts are being used when classing cars. This is what I mean by performance potential and why I strongly disagree with current "philosophy" of classing cars based on perceived utility. That way you could have a wagon running against a sports coupe in a class if the numbers match up. How fun would that be? But that is just my opinion.

It is what it is and I'm not a subject matter expert. Either way we are all gambling with our money and time one way or another.

I completely understand what you are saying, however implementing such tests is virtually impossible...especially with new cars as they come out. We are fortunate to be in the position to "test" the CTR, but it's only because of the timing...the car was released too late to be considered for this year, so it gave us some time to wait. Most of the time we don't have the luxury of time, and we have a membership demanding inclusion as soon as the cars are released (sometimes before).



Some other notes regarding this test coming up (and any others) is that it still is only one data point, one course, one day, one surface, etc. Orchestrating this test is challenging and involves some people traveling big distances to pull it off. Making that happen again on another day/surface/conditions just isn't reality. Lastly when it comes to tests like this prep is a huge issue. When new cars come out there is no prep, so no matter what we will still have to read between the lines. The ND as mentioned above improved greatly with the right prep, where as my Camaro has been great out of the box...no way to tell until way after classifications must be made. For reference, the CTR will have tires and an alignment, maybe a rear bar (nothing really exists yet). Additionally the tires will be smaller than ideal because there are no legal 19" wheels on the market yet.


Again thanks for the kind words everyone, I resisted chiming in but just felt it was important to be as transparent as possible

[DaWorstPlaya]

Thanks for being completely transparent Mark. I understand you guys are in the unenviable position of having to get as much data as you can given limited time and resources. Then having to make decisions that effect majority of the membership for no pay and mostly boos I may add.

I wonder if this is an opportunity for the SCCA to partner with a show like Motortrend. Where a SCCA representative can take part in the testing of any new car that gets released to the press. Eg: run on a "standard" auto-x course. Perhaps bringing a few buddies with different auto-x cars to have the same driver run that course the same day to see how it stacks up on that surface at those particular temps. It will probably never fully settle the controversy surrounding classing but may help add a little more scientific data to help extrapolate. Wishful thinking.

I think your assumption is correct that street tires has helped move interest back into street classes. I know several people that drove in ST* who made the switch to Street, present company included.

I'm sure the CS car had 2 way MCS as I drooled all over it at that time. You are also correct that they were running Gen 1 Rivals (not S or S1.5) while the rest of the competition was on RE71Rs which hurt their performance. Ron Baur's STR Miata was also there on display and well setup.

I think it is great that members of the SAC communicate openly with the rest of the SCCA membership. I understand decisions that favor some are going to leave others out in the cold. It's the nature of the game. But I also think rules and classing should never be made in a vacuum as that tends to alienate people if it is not well thought out.

A heartfelt thanks for volunteer work you are doing in the SAC. Keep up the good work and slow down a little so the rest of us can catch you.

Cheers!

[strat61caster]

The tire thing is so true, I have no desire to build a SP+ car because you're either swapping tires at the event or trailering. And if I have the money and space for a reliable tow vehicle and car sized trailer along with a racecar and Hoosiers... as much as I love autox I'd rather take something to the track and go wheel to wheel. Sure streetable SP cars exist, so do ST cars that live on a trailer, they're usually the exception, not the norm.

As long as the street class doesn't become "Oh you don't have one of the 10 cars that are good right now? Sorry you don't stand a chance" it'll be fine.

Every class has at least 2 different cars in the top 5 this year except SS, AS (meh C5 v C6, still a 'Vette), and CS, and many have 3 with tight finishes. Right now we've got somewhere in the low ~20's for Nationally competitive chassis in Street class, not counting the ones that are just underdeveloped for one reason or another. Striking the balance between a billion classes vs. not enough options is hard without tossing in the factor of course dependency.

Whether the Camaro is an overdog or not will only be proven if more people bring them to events and the data shows if it's an easy button or if our current data point is an abnormality. Just like CS, speculate all you want but it ain't over until the fat lady sings.

[ULLLOSE]

Originally Posted by race2win

I may be wrong about the shocks, are you sure that wasn't the STR car Ron Bauer drove? Either way, a couple more data-points regarding the ND in 2015-2016... The GRM/Mazda exhibition car was on Rivals when everyone else was on 71Rs (remember, the original Rival and Rival S did not like Lincoln at all). In 2016 Andy is listed as "Multi" for tires, if memory serves this was because he started on BFGs and switched to 71Rs (again like everyone else was running). Point is, there was nothing sneaky going on regarding the original classing of the car in 2015, and that the runs were taken after the announcement was made.

Long Road Racing brought two NDs that year, one set up for CS (with GRM) one for STR (with SportsCar). Both had a series of drivers test them out on the test course throughout the week. Both were pretty well developed by then end of the event.

[Biggins]

Thanks Mark. I wrote one of the original letters requesting the CS/DS split of FRS/BRZs. I stand by it, but I do regret writing the letter. I also still firmly believe a fully prepped ND is a BS car, but I understand why it is in CS and it will be popular for years to come. As of now, I plan to continue driving my TRD FRS in CS and hope to eventually (next year?) have good shocks on it.

I ran my TRD FRS at a Match, Champ and Nationals this season and was solidly mid-pack all year. I did well locally falling in consistently 0.8-1.2 seconds back of two Nat trophy NDs locally. I am still convinced that the TRD FRS will work against the ND on certain courses, but I have not had the budget to be on the best tires/shocks/setup at each event. However, I still defer to the test-n-tune in DC a couple years ago when I did some runs in the Garfield ND before they owned it vs. my TRD FRS... I was 1.2 seconds faster in the ND after 2 runs than the prior 16 in my FRS. I knew the TRD FRS had a huge uphill battle which is why I immediately wrote the CS/DS split letter. As far as I'm concerned, it's settled and I'll continue to be the only TRD FRS left in CS. I'd like to try a 2017 though against the NDs.

I think the Camaro 2.0T that you are driving is appropriately classed. I know people look at thrust curves and other charts to see what is the "favorite" car, but I still want someone to try a 228i M-Sport in DS. It is just a bit out of my price range, but I think it would be a decent car in DS.

I know it's our biggest event, but I hate that Nationals alone seems to influence decisions and induce knee-jerk reactions to people who do well in an oddball car. The CTR will be a really tough call because I think it's such an in-between car. BS for tours and DS for Pros?

[Banannie]

[Bimble Bamble]

@Biggins join the ssc in wdcr region with me! I know all these class changes lately suck for 86s. You are an og for sticking it out in c street with that nd driver talent, props!

Personally I think the SSC class is a great idea! I will be joining. I got lucky as I was just about to start on an stx build I didn't want to do anyway. I also got lucky because I bought my frs when they made the trd parts legal and have been on that setup for 3 seasons. The SSC setup should be very familiar, think I may make a run at nats next year!

Bonus, this will be a good track setup too!

Question: would the 949 6UL not qualify because it's 16.65 lbs? Can we round up lol?
Also, can we start a new thread for this class please for wheel questions, etc.?

[14stu]

Originally Posted by Patrick_B

@Biggins join the ssc in wdcr region with me! I know all these class changes lately suck for 86s. You are an og for sticking it out in c street with that nd driver talent, props!

Personally I think the SSC class is a great idea! I will be joining. I got lucky as I was just about to start on an stx build I didn't want to do anyway. I also got lucky because I bought my frs when they made the trd parts legal and have been on that setup for 3 seasons. The SSC setup should be very familiar, think I may make a run at nats next year!

Bonus, this will be a good track setup too!

Question: would the 949 6UL not qualify because it's 16.65 lbs? Can we round up lol?
Also, can we start a new thread for this class please for wheel questions, etc.?

Sounds like you need some steel hub centering rings attached to the 6UL's. That'd get them up to spec weight (you'll need to affix them to the wheels, but that shouldn't be too tough).

[Shark_Bait88]

I'm guessing they'll base minimum weights off of factory weight, not a wheel with added weight.

Pretty sure the parameters were set in TR's interest. One of the most attractive wheels that's legal for the class based on weight, offset, and price is the TRMotorsport FF10. I doubt that's a coincidence. I'd be willing to bet money that the 17lb minimum requirement was put in place specifically to eliminate the 6UL and RPF1 as options.

[blkwrxwag]

The FF10 looks ugly to me. I'm looking at the Rota Titan.

[Bimble Bamble]

Originally Posted by Shark_Bait88

I'm guessing they'll base minimum weights off of factory weight, not a wheel with added weight.

Pretty sure the parameters were set in TR's interest. One of the most attractive wheels that's legal for the class based on weight, offset, and price is the TRMotorsport FF10. I doubt that's a coincidence. I'd be willing to bet money that the 17lb minimum requirement was put in place specifically to eliminate the 6UL and RPF1 as options.

Doh! The 949 is sooo nice. Might as well just get the TR C4 for only $119 a wheel, slightly better offset albeit minimal than the FF10. The FF10 def looks better in 17x9. They had the FF10 on closeout for $119 a wheel too!