Sonic banned from stock class

I, for one, really enjoy my R-comps in stock class, and I don't make Romney money.

It takes the car I drive every day, in normal traffic, and transforms into an unstoppable force ripping at the pavement. Sorry, street tires are no substitute for the Purple Crack.

..and before someone says to go run SP if I like R's, remember that thing I said about not having Romney money. Cost of prep and repair, and the loss of streetability are all no starters for me.

I should do a search, there might be one of these threads already.

Oh, I'm sure there is....

DILYSI Dave wrote:

Javelin wrote: Or a Yaris for that matter. The Solo Board is sooooo out of touch with reality it's not even funny anymore.

Yeah, those guys suck! <--- One of those guys. The Stock Advisory Committee is working on alternatives to the current method of determining classification based on rollover risk, but the reality is that there is a lot of tall and narrow stuff being released these days. Trust me when I say that it was a major gut check to not let the Fiat 500 through.

And I stand by my statement. The same club is passing all of these same cars as suitable for a road course with minimal prep (B-Spec), yet thinks they are too unsafe to dodge cones in a parking lot (using a ludicrous tire rule), while cars that have a history of bizarre handling and/or are similar in size/build are welcomed with open arms (Original Mini, MINI, Mazda2, Festiva, Fiesta, Metro/Firefly, xA, xB, Soul, Fit, etc, etc, etc...).

You can get any car to roll with a stock suspension and really sticky tires. Case in point:

Banning the Sonic is stupid. Oh, and that picture was hotlinked.

N Sperlo wrote: In reply to Klayfish: The iQ is now eligible for the $20.12 Challenge.

Is iQ pronounced "eye cue" or just "ik"?

Javelin wrote:

DILYSI Dave wrote:

Javelin wrote: Or a Yaris for that matter. The Solo Board is sooooo out of touch with reality it's not even funny anymore.

Yeah, those guys suck! <--- One of those guys. The Stock Advisory Committee is working on alternatives to the current method of determining classification based on rollover risk, but the reality is that there is a lot of tall and narrow stuff being released these days. Trust me when I say that it was a major gut check to not let the Fiat 500 through.

And I stand by my statement. The same club is passing all of these same cars as suitable for a road course with minimal prep (B-Spec), yet thinks they are too unsafe to dodge cones in a parking lot (using a ludicrous tire rule), while cars that have a history of bizarre handling and/or are similar in size/build are welcomed with open arms (Original Mini, MINI, Mazda2, Festiva, Fiesta, Metro/Firefly, xA, xB, Soul, Fit, etc, etc, etc...).

Minimal spec includes mandatory safety equipment like approved cages, restraint systems and fire suppression. Even the drivers won't get to compete in B-spec without passing an appropriate training regimen.

None of that applies to Solo.

Try again?

Oh please.

Klayfish wrote: So I'm guessing this will be banned too when it hits showrooms this year? It's the Scion iQ. Should find some other kind of competition these things could be in...pinebox derby?

I saw one of those on the highway today while on my way to work. The Scion iQ looks even goofier in real life than it does in pictures!

Javelin wrote: xB

FYI, this is also on the exclusion list.

Did all of the other cars listed also not have published SSF ratings?

ProDarwin wrote:

Javelin wrote: xB

FYI, this is also on the exclusion list. Did all of the other cars listed also not have published SSF ratings?

I think that's the point that's being missed by several people in this thread.

David S. Wallens wrote: Funny, there's currently a Sonic sitting in my driveway. No, I'm not going to try to roll it.

Please, please please try to!!!

Twin_Cam wrote: You can get any car to roll with a stock suspension and really sticky tires. Case in point: Banning the Sonic is stupid. Oh, and that picture was hotlinked.

...and thats why I drive a Saturn....

93EXCivic wrote:

92CelicaHalfTrac wrote:

nocones wrote: I have an Idea.. Get rid of R-compound stock tires allowing only ST type tires and rollover risk should go down enough that cars like the Sonic/Fiat 500 would be elligible. Pours Gasoline.. Lights match.. runs away..

Logic? NO.

Yeah. I always thought R-comps were stupid in a "stock" class.

this. Or really, just have two classes "actually stock using street tires" and "Stock R." problem solved, everyone's happy.

Unless you own a Porsche GT2, of course....then you can run your "stock" r-comps....

As I read SCCA Solo rule 1.1, local regions are free to modify the national SCCA classing rules to fit their needs. If people want a street tire "stock" class, then the region can offer one.

For all of you "Street tires in Stock!" people (I'm one of you) - There are going to be street tire index classes offered at the National Tours this year. The level of interest in these classes will help us decide if the idea is one that deserves another look, or is simply a bunch of internet talk, with no action to back it up. In short - if you want to help your cause, showing up and competing in these classes is the very best way to do so.

FlightService wrote:

David S. Wallens wrote: Funny, there's currently a Sonic sitting in my driveway. No, I'm not going to try to roll it.

Please, please please try to!!!

No, no. I hate making those "guess what?" phone calls. And fortunately it's been a while since I had to make one.

Ralph Wallens. How does that sound? Perhaps David Nadar?
This could be your swan-song. In the name of journalistic integrity, your title could be, "Unsafe at Parking Lot Speeds." That company who brought terror the the US people before could be at it again.

The muckraking should be easy.

What the heck is a Chevy Sonic?

(googles...)

Wait...srsly? We're banning that?

I always thought the anti-rollover worry for Solo (and rallycross) was not so much for driver safety so much as WORKER safety.

Circuits don't have corner workers, amateur corner workers, corner workers who despite the driver's meeting are probably talking on their phone or gabbing with other people at the station or otherwise NOT watching their surroundings... 10-20 feet from the course.

I agree that R-compounds shouldn't be allowed in Stock class, for the simple fact that TODAY'S R-compounds, especially the autocross-specific ones, allow absurd levels of grip compared to the DOT-Rs of yesteryear. And they're being put on cars that are not allowed to have any major suspension changes. Sure, you can get a set of super expensive 30-way variable damping shocks so that you can run $1200 worth of tires, but how many people are buying the shocks vs. how many people are buying the tires?

Here is the "Z-spec" concept of the Sonic

DILYSI Dave wrote: For all of you "Street tires in Stock!" people (I'm one of you) - There are going to be street tire index classes offered at the National Tours this year. The level of interest in these classes will help us decide if the idea is one that deserves another look, or is simply a bunch of internet talk, with no action to back it up. In short - if you want to help your cause, showing up and competing in these classes is the very best way to do so.

This. I also believe in the street tire stock concept, but the current rules are written with r-comps in mind, so such a change would likely result in a complete revamping of Stock classes. While this not unthinkable, there still needs to be solid case to make it happen.

93EXCivic wrote:

92CelicaHalfTrac wrote:

nocones wrote: I have an Idea.. Get rid of R-compound stock tires allowing only ST type tires and rollover risk should go down enough that cars like the Sonic/Fiat 500 would be elligible. Pours Gasoline.. Lights match.. runs away..

Logic? NO.

Yeah. I always thought R-comps were stupid in a "stock" class.

I'm staying out of this. I got my pants roasted just about as badly as I ever have on the internet for daring to suggest it was stupid to put fast tires on slow cars and limit fast cars to slow tires.

GM didn't seem too worried about how tippy they may be when they but journalists in them on a very autocross-esque course: linky with video

Won't the stability nanny make the car slow enough to be safe?

Gearheadotaku wrote: Won't the stability nanny make the car slow enough to be safe?

OnStar: "We're seeing that you are trying to actually do something fun with your car. Are you alright? Has there been head trauma? Should we shut your car off for you?"