scca autocross reorganization

Duke wrote: I believe - just going out on a limb here - that ya'll missed Bob's point a little.

Was our floormat talking again?

The funniest part is that I think they're both on the same page but have somehow failed to realize they're both talking about the same thing.

And FWIW, there hasn't been a single "magic bullet" tire in a long time, the current crop of autox/street rubber are all close enough to be on a levelish playing field. Different drive layouts, weights, balance, and power levels might prefer one of the tires over the other.

yamaha wrote: Different drive layouts, weights, balance, and power levels might prefer one of the tires over the other.

Very true. The Rival sucked on the STC civics at Lincoln, but were awesome on the fatter STF cars. same surface, different cars and something different worked.

Sorta related, but for those clubs looking for something extra, check out the Martin Sports Car Club--they're the people who run our $2000 Challenge autocrosses.

In addition to year-end trophies for each classes, they also do year-end trophies for each category: Stock, Street Prepared, etc.

The big action is the fight for Tiger points. What's a Tiger point? Good question. First, no idea why it's named after that animal. However, they have a system that lets the entire club battle for overall honors. I believe a fella named Randy Pobst claimed that title one year, but don't quote me. You can find details in their rulebook: http://www.martinscc.org/files/2213/8946/6007/Rule_Book_2014_version4.pdf

What it does is create a neat venue where everyone's part of a giant points race. It's fun.

Ian F wrote: In reply to mtownneon: IMHO, the way to keep CAM 'fun' is to NEVER make it a Nationals trophy/jacket class. That 'should' help to keep a lot of win-at-all-costs autocross types away. And/or keep the PAX artificially high.

I agree with you 100%. There are those in the club that are already pushing for it to be a National class. They also want the rules severely tightened with of course their current combination being the "perfect benchmark". IMHO, more rules would just kill the whole thing. The best thing about the Pro-Touring movement and CAM as it is right now is that people are free to build how they want. Right now I run a lightly modified S197 Mustang but in my garage is a '79 Aspen R/T that I'm building that is getting a Laughlin BGN North chassis and a Gen III Hemi. In Indy's CAM class right now are cars from mild to wild and we're all over each other time-wise. Yeah, the class is mostly newer Mustangs but Travis Hartwell's '77 Trans Am took 2nd at our last event only .193sec behind the winner in a '96 Mustang Cobra. Also competing was a '69 Z-28 and a Coyote powered 427 Cobra replica. Cool cars, cool people, and awesome competition, can't ask for more than that so why mess with it.

I'm OK-ish with S197's and such being in CAM. It's not inherently better than an old horse that has been re-engineered and updated. That said, allowing the C5/C6/C7 is bad news IMO.

"Nationals" seems to turn any sort of racing into a money and ego game

DILYSI Dave wrote: I'm OK-ish with S197's and such being in CAM. It's not inherently better than an old horse that has been re-engineered and updated. That said, allowing the C5/C6/C7 is bad news IMO.

I'm not sure I'd want the C4 in there either.

In reply to Ian F:

The ease with which they spin on 200TW tires? I'm OK with them in there.

In reply to DILYSI Dave: In Sports Car magazine, they mentioned that they may change CAM a little next year to cut off the old American cars from the new ones. CAM1 for pre-1980 cars and CAM2 for post-1980 cars maybe, especially to separate the C5 and C6s from the old school cars. I don't know how they feel about C4s competing against pro-touring cars.

C5 and C6 are the only cars in our local CAM class

That's going to discourage the Pro-Touring guys from competing.