|
Re: SCCA is adding a Solo class just for Pro-Touring cars!
[Re: amxautox]
#1553186
01/07/14 05:13 PM
01/07/14 05:13 PM
|
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 22,696
Bitopia
jcc
If you can't dazzle em with diamonds..
|
If you can't dazzle em with diamonds..
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 22,696
Bitopia
|
So you drive an Atom?
Actually adding weight where and how you want it, is a performance advantage in itself vs the owner that struggles to get to min, other then the cost, hassle, and retuning.
Last edited by jcc; 01/07/14 05:16 PM.
|
|
|
Re: SCCA is adding a Solo class just for Pro-Touring cars!
[Re: jcc]
#1553187
01/07/14 05:33 PM
01/07/14 05:33 PM
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 96,661
On The Boat, On The Lake, Wa. ...
amxautox
Still Retired. Still Posting on Moparts. A Lot.
|
Still Retired. Still Posting on Moparts. A Lot.
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 96,661
On The Boat, On The Lake, Wa. ...
|
No, the AMX weighs between 3,050 and 3,100. Why would I want it to weigh 3,600?
Tom
"Everyone should believe in something; I believe I'll go fishing."
-Henry David Thoreau
Men and fish are alike. They both get into trouble when they open their mouths
author unknown
|
|
|
Re: SCCA is adding a Solo class just for Pro-Touring cars!
[Re: amxautox]
#1553189
01/07/14 07:59 PM
01/07/14 07:59 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,442
NW Chicago suburban area
Mopar Mitch
pro stock
|
pro stock
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,442
NW Chicago suburban area
|
Personally, I really think the SCCA E/Street Prepared (basically, I refer to the "Street Prepared" catagory) concept of their rules are very, very good and keep the cost reasonably down and to the benefit of the average wrenching garage do-it-yourselfer car nut. I would only request of them (the SCCA) to exit certain vehicles which they've recently allowed into the E/SP class (the little foreign imports have too much advantage in their short wheel base configuration). In other words, I'd favor more Classic American Pony/Muscle cars to be the domain of entrants within E/SP. You could get into models/years/special options, etc, but the "Street Prepared" category is, basically, a class/category that allows bolt-on mods, update/backdate, and without internal engine modifications. I've built my car around that set of rules... ran that class since its inception back in ~1985 to current... very satisfied with the competition and concept of the E/SP class/category.... may, possibly, still someday get back active into it (I observe the local current events, as well as the SCCA national-level competition/entrants). Now... I'm considering another club here in the midwest (WIS/IL/IN/MI) (www.mcscc.org) featuring "hi-speed" road course solo/autocross competition.. (and their rules are different than the SCCA Solo rules, and car classifications of types/models/years, etc, that I've been accustomed to)... based upon "points per modification".. which, quite honestly, I feel is too arbitrarily assessed.... I've tried, to a small extent, in getting that system changed ... like world war 3 breaking out... oh well... maybe I'll join them rather than fight them... and it's a well run series with good social gatherings, etc. "If ya wanta play the game.. ya gotta play by the rules.." 
Mopar Mitch
"Road racers and autocrossers go in deeper and come out harder!"... and rain never stops us from having fun with our cars... in fact, it makes us better drivers!
Check out MOPAR ACTION MAGAZINE, August 2006 issue for feature article and specs on my autocross T/A!
|
|
|
Re: SCCA is adding a Solo class just for Pro-Touring cars!
[Re: Dan@Hotchkis]
#1553190
01/07/14 08:36 PM
01/07/14 08:36 PM
|
Joined: Aug 2012
Posts: 163
Speedway In.
IndyDave
OP
member
|
OP
member
Joined: Aug 2012
Posts: 163
Speedway In.
|
The intent of CAM as it is now is to help Regions who are seeing more Pro-Touring cars by giving them a standardized class structure and set of rules. Up until now, PT cars wind up many times in E Street Prepared, C Prepared, X Prepared, E Modified, or lumped in some other class where they may or may not be competitive depending on what the level of competition in that given region may be. The decision to go the way the SCCA did was because 1)they mimic rules that pro touring competitors are already familiar with and 2)allow Regions a lot of flexibility in classing. The only "new" rule for PT competitors is the weight rule. That rule was added because of PT competitor input and a concern for lightweight kit cars having an unfair advantage. Because of the lack of "National" status, a detailed rule set isn't needed or advantageous.
Now if SCCA decides to grant National status then yes, rules would need to be more clearly defined and then proposed rule sets like Dan's and others make sense. Right now the goal is just give PT car owners a place to play at the regional level. It's not perfect but neither are Goodguys, American Street Car, et-al rules. But then again their rules were crafted to regulate cars that already existed.
If someone is foolish enough to build a CAM class "killer" car as CAM exists now, that person would be a fool. If someone wants to go to that much effort for Regional Championship and the $10 trophy that goes with it, that's their decision. If they wind up building a white elephant if the class goes National (assuming it ever does), that is their problem.
I know what I'm doing. The Mustang I'm running now will get a little more attention and a fresh set of 200TW tires and the PT Aspen I'm building is still going to be built the way I want to build it. That means it's still getting a Laughlin stock car chassis because that's what I want.
Dave Dusterberg
1979 Aspen R/T (soon to be #19 CAM/T)
2002 Ram 1500 SLT
2005 Magnum R/T
2005 Mustang GT SCCA CAM/C #19
|
|
|
Re: SCCA is adding a Solo class just for Pro-Touring cars!
[Re: IndyDave]
#1553191
01/07/14 11:01 PM
01/07/14 11:01 PM
|
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,302
Nebraska
72Swinger
master
|
master
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,302
Nebraska
|
Quote:
The intent of CAM as it is now is to help Regions who are seeing more Pro-Touring cars by giving them a standardized class structure and set of rules. Up until now, PT cars wind up many times in E Street Prepared, C Prepared, X Prepared, E Modified, or lumped in some other class where they may or may not be competitive depending on what the level of competition in that given region may be. The decision to go the way the SCCA did was because 1)they mimic rules that pro touring competitors are already familiar with and 2)allow Regions a lot of flexibility in classing. The only "new" rule for PT competitors is the weight rule. That rule was added because of PT competitor input and a concern for lightweight kit cars having an unfair advantage. Because of the lack of "National" status, a detailed rule set isn't needed or advantageous.
Now if SCCA decides to grant National status then yes, rules would need to be more clearly defined and then proposed rule sets like Dan's and others make sense. Right now the goal is just give PT car owners a place to play at the regional level. It's not perfect but neither are Goodguys, American Street Car, et-al rules. But then again their rules were crafted to regulate cars that already existed.
If someone is foolish enough to build a CAM class "killer" car as CAM exists now, that person would be a fool. If someone wants to go to that much effort for Regional Championship and the $10 trophy that goes with it, that's their decision. If they wind up building a white elephant if the class goes National (assuming it ever does), that is their problem.
I know what I'm doing. The Mustang I'm running now will get a little more attention and a fresh set of 200TW tires and the PT Aspen I'm building is still going to be built the way I want to build it. That means it's still getting a Laughlin stock car chassis because that's what I want.
What Dave no love for the RamVan?
Mopar to the bone!!!
|
|
|
Re: SCCA is adding a Solo class just for Pro-Touring cars!
[Re: 72Swinger]
#1553192
01/08/14 04:29 AM
01/08/14 04:29 AM
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,442
NW Chicago suburban area
Mopar Mitch
pro stock
|
pro stock
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,442
NW Chicago suburban area
|
Indy Dave - Your Aspen will be an awesome car. Wouldn't it be better suited to run in the SCCA C/Prepared Solo class? Example: It could/would run with John Sandberg's AAR.
Mopar Mitch
"Road racers and autocrossers go in deeper and come out harder!"... and rain never stops us from having fun with our cars... in fact, it makes us better drivers!
Check out MOPAR ACTION MAGAZINE, August 2006 issue for feature article and specs on my autocross T/A!
|
|
|
Re: SCCA is adding a Solo class just for Pro-Touring cars!
[Re: IndyDave]
#1553194
01/08/14 08:54 PM
01/08/14 08:54 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,491
Lethbridge, AB, Canada
dangina
pro stock
|
pro stock
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,491
Lethbridge, AB, Canada
|
I like the weight restriction rule, so the bigger bodies, B+C can finally compete more with the pony cars. Last thing I wanna see is everyone building a+e bodies, mustangs and camaros, I see alot of that already. I still think the limit should be 74+, not 78 but thats a personal opinion lol
|
|
|
Re: SCCA is adding a Solo class just for Pro-Touring cars!
[Re: dangina]
#1553195
01/08/14 11:58 PM
01/08/14 11:58 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 813
Ontario,Canada
brads70
super stock
|
super stock
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 813
Ontario,Canada
|
Quote:
I like the weight restriction rule, so the bigger bodies, B+C can finally compete more with the pony cars. Last thing I wanna see is everyone building a+e bodies, mustangs and camaros, I see alot of that already. I still think the limit should be 74+, not 78 but thats a personal opinion lol
I'd like to see classes also based on weight, say in 200 lbs increments ? No way I'd get my car down to 3000LBS and still be a everyday cruiser. 200-300 Lbs makes a difference, especially in tires and brakes. If I was to build a purpose built racecar, autocross would not be my venue of choice. Maybe add people/passengers to make weight? Sure would be fun for spectators! 
|
|
|
Re: SCCA is adding a Solo class just for Pro-Touring cars!
[Re: Tomswheels]
#1553199
03/21/15 11:21 PM
03/21/15 11:21 PM
|
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 12,375
SoCal
MuuMuu101
I got lucky at Woodward!
|
I got lucky at Woodward!
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 12,375
SoCal
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quick question for the Cam-S rules... If Corvette's and Vipers aren't allowed, which vehicles qualify for this class? Is it just for the builds that weigh less than 3000 lbs.
http://scca.cdn.racersites.com/prod/assets/2015%20CAM%20handout%20APPENDIX%20B%20%283%292.pdf
Samy, just C4 and newer Corvettes aren't allowed, and it's also for all pre-1979 American cars with a wheelbase of 107" or less. So C1-C3 Corvettes, Cobras, in our region a Maverick and a Mustang II...
Ah... I forgot about the C1-3's and the Cobra.
|
|
|
Re: SCCA is adding a Solo class just for Pro-Touring cars!
[Re: Tomswheels]
#1553201
03/21/15 11:31 PM
03/21/15 11:31 PM
|
Joined: Aug 2012
Posts: 163
Speedway In.
IndyDave
OP
member
|
OP
member
Joined: Aug 2012
Posts: 163
Speedway In.
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quick question for the Cam-S rules... If Corvette's and Vipers aren't allowed, which vehicles qualify for this class? Is it just for the builds that weigh less than 3000 lbs.
http://scca.cdn.racersites.com/prod/assets/2015%20CAM%20handout%20APPENDIX%20B%20%283%292.pdf
Samy, just C4 and newer Corvettes aren't allowed, and it's also for all pre-1979 American cars with a wheelbase of 107" or less. So C1-C3 Corvettes, Cobras, in our region a Maverick and a Mustang II...
CAM-S is still pretty fluid right now. One of the challenges with CAM is balancing the rule set to work well for both Regional competition and the Challenge / Invitational events. The late model Corvettes and Vipers are outlawed from CAM because we learned quickly that at the Regional level, if those cars started competing in CAM, it killed participation. Those cars are competitive elsewhere within the Solo class structure so the decision was made to outlaw those cars. Now in the case of the C-4 there was a lot of debate on whether to outlaw them. But on the other hand, with the catch-all, run what you brung nature of CAM-S does it really make a difference? CAM is still a work in progress but one of the goals is to keep the rules simple, short, and as open as possible.
Dave Dusterberg
1979 Aspen R/T (soon to be #19 CAM/T)
2002 Ram 1500 SLT
2005 Magnum R/T
2005 Mustang GT SCCA CAM/C #19
|
|
|
Re: SCCA is adding a Solo class just for Pro-Touring cars!
[Re: dangina]
#1553202
03/21/15 11:34 PM
03/21/15 11:34 PM
|
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 12,375
SoCal
MuuMuu101
I got lucky at Woodward!
|
I got lucky at Woodward!
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 12,375
SoCal
|
Quote:
looks like I'd be in CAM-T if I ever tried out for it, hopefully next year 
I'm trying to get the Dart ready for the Hotchkis Autorcross next week. I'm changing out a shock tonight. I'm doing an oil change on Monday. My friend is coming over Tuesday to make me some brake lines and help me bleed the system. Besides that, I need to grease all the ball joints and get an alignment. Hopefully the 273 doesn't give out on me for sitting the past 6 months and I'll be driving it soon.
|
|
|
Re: SCCA is adding a Solo class just for Pro-Touring cars!
[Re: RodStRace]
#1553204
03/22/15 12:24 AM
03/22/15 12:24 AM
|
Joined: Oct 2013
Posts: 380
Escondido CA USA
Tomswheels
enthusiast
|
enthusiast
Joined: Oct 2013
Posts: 380
Escondido CA USA
|
Here are the results from the CAM-T SCCA national tour event here at San Diego today. Both of the Camaros are 100K invested cars. The Mustangs and the Valiant all have less than 25K into them...
Last edited by Tomswheels; 03/22/15 12:28 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
