SCCA Solo Class Article/Discussion

General discussions about Solo

Moderator: Mike Simanyi

User avatar
Mako Koiwai
Posts: 6490
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 11:25 am
Club: SCNAX
Car#: 34
Location: South Pasadena, CA
Contact:

SCCA Solo Class Article/Discussion

Post by Mako Koiwai » Fri May 06, 2011 8:41 am

http://solomatters.wordpress.com/2011/0 ... ing-stock/

Let's help to finally get the SCCA Solo Stock/Entry Class's fixed to help bring up entries and membership

User avatar
Vincent Wong
Posts: 231
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 11:26 am
Club: PSCC
Car#: 107
Location: West Covina
Contact:

Re: SCCA Solo Class Article/Discussion

Post by Vincent Wong » Fri May 06, 2011 8:46 am

My preference.....get rid of the r-comp tires!!!

User avatar
Doug Kott
Posts: 420
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 11:29 am
Club: CASOC
Car#: 300

Re: SCCA Solo Class Article/Discussion

Post by Doug Kott » Fri May 06, 2011 9:52 am

Vincent Wong wrote:My preference.....get rid of the r-comp tires!!!
I agree. Whatever street tire you can cram on the stock wheels is allowed, and as Tom Berry has championed too, a return to OE shocks. We don't want Hoosier to go out of business, but we don't want a tail-wagging-the-dog scenario either.


Or rename "Stock" to "$$$$shock". }:)

Michael Wood
Posts: 275
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 11:26 am

Re: SCCA Solo Class Article/Discussion

Post by Michael Wood » Fri May 06, 2011 10:32 am

It is interesting to see the responses/comments, particularly those that look at the article as "unbiased", which it clearly was not. You could just as easily explain the numbers in terms of "cannabilization" of a fixed pool of autocrossers by newly introduced classes. In that case, the discussion is around attracting more autocrossers, in total, not slicing and dicing what we have today. You also have to ask yourself, is ST* success (which is the area pulling the most stock competitors...they sure as heck aren't going to SP or P/M) due to tires or the broader rule set...

I'm not saying Heyward didn't do a great job putting the story together and supporting his ideas, just that it really didn't have any "B" argument to offset the direction he took things.

In any case, this is definitely a subject that is on the radar. I'm not opposed to running on 140's and I currently enjoy r-comps, so I'm good either way. :thumbup:

User avatar
Steve Ekstrand
Solo Safety Steward
Posts: 7432
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 11:26 am
Club: CASOC
Car#: 15
Location: This space left intentionally blank
Contact:

Re: SCCA Solo Class Article/Discussion

Post by Steve Ekstrand » Fri May 06, 2011 10:43 am

ST classes make tremendous sense to me in the context of autocross. "Fix" the handling. Fix the suspension and the shocks are important but less so than stock class. The tires wear better with the handling improved. The car is more fun. There should be the same variety of ST options for classing as there are SP.

With all the new regulations coming to new cars I don't see where stock class has much of a future.
Dr. Conemangler
aka The Malefic One
2015 Wildcat Honda F600

User avatar
Jason Isley BS RX8
Posts: 1129
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 11:26 am
Car#: 0
Location: Coto de Caza
Contact:

Re: SCCA Solo Class Article/Discussion

Post by Jason Isley BS RX8 » Fri May 06, 2011 11:08 am

Michael Wood wrote:It is interesting to see the responses/comments, particularly those that look at the article as "unbiased", which it clearly was not. You could just as easily explain the numbers in terms of "cannabilization" of a fixed pool of autocrossers by newly introduced classes. In that case, the discussion is around attracting more autocrossers, in total, not slicing and dicing what we have today. You also have to ask yourself, is ST* success (which is the area pulling the most stock competitors...they sure as heck aren't going to SP or P/M) due to tires or the broader rule set...

I'm not saying Heyward didn't do a great job putting the story together and supporting his ideas, just that it really didn't have any "B" argument to offset the direction he took things.

In any case, this is definitely a subject that is on the radar. I'm not opposed to running on 140's and I currently enjoy r-comps, so I'm good either way. :thumbup:
Exactly. :roll:

Lets take the tire cost comparison of then VS now and apply it to the front running stock cars of then VS now. And without fail every time someone does a R VS St cost analysis they always pick the small stuff. Price the 18" and bigger tires.

User avatar
Robert Puertas
Posts: 1089
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 11:26 am
Club: PSCC
Car#: 44

Re: SCCA Solo Class Article/Discussion

Post by Robert Puertas » Fri May 06, 2011 11:17 am

The Z06 is dead!
:lol:

User avatar
Rick Brown
Current Solo Director
Posts: 4892
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 11:25 am
Club: PSCC
Car#: 240
Location: Lake Elsinore, CA

Re: SCCA Solo Class Article/Discussion

Post by Rick Brown » Fri May 06, 2011 11:20 am

Don't know what other regions do, but one thing that supports the elimination of R-tires is the popularity of the SK classes here and in SD.
Since light is faster than sound...many people look bright until they speak...

Michael Wood
Posts: 275
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 11:26 am

Re: SCCA Solo Class Article/Discussion

Post by Michael Wood » Fri May 06, 2011 11:22 am

Robert Puertas wrote:The Z06 is dead!
Sincerely,
Ted
:lol:
fixed. :P

User avatar
Bill Schenker
Former CSCC Overall Champion
Posts: 1681
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 11:26 am
Club: SCNAX
Car#: 14
Location: Corona del Mar
Contact:

Re: SCCA Solo Class Article/Discussion

Post by Bill Schenker » Fri May 06, 2011 12:16 pm

Michael Wood wrote:...I'm not opposed to running on 140's and I currently enjoy r-comps, so I'm good either way. :thumbup:
Two things come to mind:

1) "140" tires are a joke; they are no more "140" than Max's I.Q.

2.) The moment you outlaw R-D.O.T.s for Stock, that 140 number becomes even a bigger joke; welcome to the world of 140 "street" tires that you would never want to drive on the street.
MiataRoadster/OS Giken/ChaseCam/
2001 Mazda Miata
#14 DP

Michael Wood
Posts: 275
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 11:26 am

Re: SCCA Solo Class Article/Discussion

Post by Michael Wood » Fri May 06, 2011 12:44 pm

Bill Schenker wrote:
Michael Wood wrote:...I'm not opposed to running on 140's and I currently enjoy r-comps, so I'm good either way. :thumbup:
Two things come to mind:

1) "140" tires are a joke; they are no more "140" than Max's I.Q.

2.) The moment you outlaw R-D.O.T.s for Stock, that 140 number becomes even a bigger joke; welcome to the world of 140 "street" tires that you would never want to drive on the street.
Yep. We'd probably have to dust off the good old exclusion list...;)

User avatar
Don Salyers
Posts: 284
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 11:26 am
Club: No$
Car#: 42

Re: SCCA Solo Class Article/Discussion

Post by Don Salyers » Fri May 06, 2011 12:54 pm

Mako to wrote:http://solomatters.wordpress.com/2011/0 ... ing-stock/

Let's help to finally get the SCCA Solo Stock/Entry Class's fixed to help bring up entries and membership
Mako, no quick fix!!! It doesn't exsist, tires is not the answer! The new people to the sport can not compete on a national level even if they fully prepare the correct car!

Your other question on the RX8, is the obvious problem. New people and some that have been around for awhile think that their 2011 Hupmobile should be competitive in the stock class that it is assigned. It just won't happen.

Even if everyone has street tires, shocks, or whatever---there will still be the haves and the have-nots. Those that are autocrossers will find the right car, the right prep level, and the right tire (or I should have said the right sets of shaved new best you can buy after testing 10 different sets of "140" street tires) and still win. The 2011 Hupmobile will go home and never return, the owner will either quit or buy an old CIVIC and go to ST.

Don

User avatar
Mako Koiwai
Posts: 6490
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 11:25 am
Club: SCNAX
Car#: 34
Location: South Pasadena, CA
Contact:

Re: SCCA Solo Class Article/Discussion

Post by Mako Koiwai » Fri May 06, 2011 1:17 pm

Yet we and other regions have their own Stock Tire classes, which no doubt further decimate the true SCCA Stock Classes ... so imo we might was well make all stock classes street tired.

User avatar
Aaron Goldsmith
Posts: 2663
Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 4:22 pm
Club: CASOC
Car#: 32
Location: HB, CA
Contact:

Re: SCCA Solo Class Article/Discussion

Post by Aaron Goldsmith » Fri May 06, 2011 2:24 pm

Mako to wrote:Yet we and other regions have their own Stock Tire classes, which no doubt further decimate the true SCCA Stock Classes ... so imo we might was well make all stock classes street tired.
Well our region has a class that doesn't have any rules, so we should just make all the classes with no rules.

Jonathan Lugod
King of Fastrack!
Posts: 950
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 11:29 am
Club: SCNAX
Car#: 194
Location: Oceanside
Contact:

Re: SCCA Solo Class Article/Discussion

Post by Jonathan Lugod » Fri May 06, 2011 2:30 pm

Mako to wrote:Yet we and other regions have their own Stock Tire classes, which no doubt further decimate the true SCCA Stock Classes ... so imo we might was well make all stock classes street tired.
which most have never ran an R-tire on their stock car and are the same people who don't want to spend money on shocks, front bar, or $$$tires$$$ to be nationally competitive.
http://www.osgiken.net
4 STR- 2016 Mazda ND Miata
OS Giken / Bridgestone / Bride

Tom Denham
Posts: 603
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 11:26 am
Club: PSCC
Car#: 237

Re: SCCA Solo Class Article/Discussion

Post by Tom Denham » Fri May 06, 2011 2:51 pm

I prefer Coca-Cola classic; http://www.sccaforums.com/forums/forumi ... cope/posts" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

User avatar
Arthur Grant
Posts: 1215
Joined: Sat Oct 03, 2009 8:13 pm
Club: TCC
Car#: 314

Re: SCCA Solo Class Article/Discussion

Post by Arthur Grant » Fri May 06, 2011 3:11 pm

I will throw my hat in with Don, messing with the tire rules won't help anyone, and it will likely reduce the number of manufactures supporting our sport.

As evidence of the have and have not rule of motor sports I will offer Indy Car. All current competitors run the same motor, same gearbox, same tires, same chaisis, i.e. a pretty spec car, and there are front runners and backmarkers. You can't discount the backmarkers as poorer quality drivers as some of the have indy car series championships, race wins and more. What they don't have is a current team with the money or leadership. In fact we see this in any spec series played out again and again. I can assure you that if I got in the Berry Evo mobile and spent an entire Saturday getting in 14 runs, had brand new scuffed Hoosiers, went out and raced it on Sunday, Marshall, Tom, Christine, or a host of others could get in my Vette as is with old Kumho R-Comps or my street tires and kick my butt. Why because they are better drivers.

In my opinion one of the big overlooked issues is track perception, the faster you go the fast things happen the more you have to trust your knowledge and feel of the car. At 75 seconds last week I had time to see the course. The car could have gone into the 60's but I could see the course that fast, I was prepared to turn in before I had gotten to the cones, I don't really know the delay on transition on a autocross course. The more I do this the more I will be able to compress time, especially if the car's set up stays more or less static.

Just my thoughts.

User avatar
Aaron Goldsmith
Posts: 2663
Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 4:22 pm
Club: CASOC
Car#: 32
Location: HB, CA
Contact:

Re: SCCA Solo Class Article/Discussion

Post by Aaron Goldsmith » Fri May 06, 2011 3:17 pm

Arthur Grant wrote:, especially if the car's set up stays more or less static.
Mako? :lol: ;)

User avatar
Mako Koiwai
Posts: 6490
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 11:25 am
Club: SCNAX
Car#: 34
Location: South Pasadena, CA
Contact:

Re: SCCA Solo Class Article/Discussion

Post by Mako Koiwai » Fri May 06, 2011 4:34 pm

? This isn't about me

My concern, which is actually pretty latent since we have no regular plans to Auto Cross (we were only at the last one because I was going to be in the area for a few days anyway and we're missing a lot of our track events because of my work, and Karen wanted to race) is for the future health of SCCA Solo racing. Since we're now frequenting NASA, Speed Venture and other "alternative" racing organization's events, we're seeing that it's perhaps because of the SCCA's age and lack of flexibility that those organizers are growing while the SCCA track event participation seems to be dropping. It would be nice if all of those other folks were taking part in SCCA events.

The fact that attendance at the SCCA Solo Nationals is still high might make it seem that all is well with SCCA Solo racing, but if we don't take care of bringing in new blood, the future will not be so rosy. It wasn't that long ago that when I suggested four runs at our Champ events it was boo'ed since "real" National competitors only do 3 runs, and who would want to those extra laps on their R tires. Now it's become the accepted norm.

When you see the crowds of participants at NASA, Speed Venture, Extreme and Red Line events one has to wonder what the SCCA didn't do to attract them. The SCCA is starting Time Trials events for track newbies but in fact the much vaunted SCCA's concern with on track safety is no where near as well controlled as in NASA HPDE's, which one MUST go through before doing Time Trials or any higher level of track racing. If the SCCA officials concerned with bringing more participants into the sport would only attend a NASA HPDE 1 track day, they could learn a lot.

What does that have to do with SCCA Solo racing? It just goes to show that other organizations CAN and HAVE done a better job of bringing in new people, while maintaining a high level of safety. (Not all of them are super safety conscious.) It means that if the SCCA Solo community doesn't adapt, it can not grow let alone maintain. The problem is that the experienced leadership is too entrenched in it's ways to make things happen. Remember the premise for the Solo Matters article IS that STOCK Class participation IS DOWN, including at Nationals, while ST classes are up.

You only have to see that there are a lot more pretty girls and women racers at the other organizer's event's to realize how un-hip we've become! :lol:

David Barrish
Posts: 488
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 11:26 am
Club: PSCC
Car#: 58
Location: Lake Arrowhead

Re: SCCA Solo Class Article/Discussion

Post by David Barrish » Fri May 06, 2011 5:14 pm

Ok, now what do I do?

I have built an old car to HS and committed to running Toyo RA1 205/60/13 @ apx $145.00ish.

The challenge with 13's is getting tire companies to dig out the tooling and make new tires. Having a place to sell product would help.

With a dog in this fight I would only change the tires, no "R". Verdestien makes a tire I can buy today, at @ $162, rated at 220 AB. More importantly they build tires that can be used by a wide array of cars that could show up and run now.

The tires on the market for the ST cars are on sale now, what am I missing?

David Barrish

User avatar
Bill Martin
Posts: 509
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 11:26 am
Club: GRA
Car#: 74

Re: SCCA Solo Class Article/Discussion

Post by Bill Martin » Fri May 06, 2011 9:19 pm

I think SCCA and the solo community would be better off having available a cost-controlled stock category for it's members. But I don't know how you get there from here. Maybe you can't.

User avatar
Kurt Rahn
Posts: 3923
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 11:29 am
Club: CASOC
Car#: 88
Location: Pasadena

Re: SCCA Solo Class Article/Discussion

Post by Kurt Rahn » Sat May 07, 2011 3:46 pm

Uhhhh...no comment Image
==============
Oversteer is better than understeer because you don't see the tree you're hitting.

Morgan Trotter
Posts: 157
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 11:30 am
Club: PSCC
Car#: 61

Re: SCCA Solo Class Article/Discussion

Post by Morgan Trotter » Mon May 09, 2011 8:31 am

Being a Stock competitor myself I have thought about how to boost "Stock" classes #'s. So far this year I have either barely made a class, or (in ProSolo) been in Bump 1 and even Bump 2!

I dont believe that Street tires will make a difference beyond the regional level for participation, and as far as cost, the difference will be marginal at best. As far as I can tell, it would only reduce the cost of a weekend at a National event by about 200-300 dollars for me (16 inch tires). Showing up with new tires is still going to be a must and shaving them will reduce that savings by a bit. Practice will be cheaper, as long as the tires last longer than Hoosiers, but on some stock cars, that even is questionable.

The shock rule, well, you will have that expense in every class right? make the rule "OEM ONLY" ???? what if Moton starts making an "OEM STRUT REPLACEMENT" it will still cost $4k to set a car up on them! just like Hoosier will make a "STREET TIRE" if you change the tire rule.

There isnt a rule a manufacturer cant beat!

David Barrish made mention on his 13 inch tire situation on his 29 year old H Stock car... well, this will only be a problem for 1 more year right? at the end of the 30th calendar year the car is not eligible. There really arent many cars with 13 inch wheels that are super competitive in stock class and they end up being put away or modified to compete in another class.. ST or STS mostly.

This brings up another point. Having the right car for the class. Stock is more expensive from the get go because the "car to have" changes more often as new cars are produced. Think MSR, or the new 2011 WRX or S2K CR are a few examples. Can an MX5 compete with an MSR? sure, but which is a better car? very few cases where a car can remain on top of a stock class for many years do exist... but those cars are rare and pretty expensive and hard to find as well. think Type R! find a nice, unmolested Type R for less than 10 k and you are doing great!

enough ranting, lets look at options to boost membership and participation.
we can start advertising in local news papers, and web forums. Offer simple savings for certain clubs for example like if the local mustang club can get 10 members to participate in our event we give them 10 dollars off entry. Or something to that effect. for some, the hook is set with 1 event!

Other ways are to get event sponsors, such as Subaru to offer a free weekend pass and entry to an event with the purchase of a car. or anyone with friends in high places to get companies and manufacturers to offer contingencies. I dont know what, but its something that keeps a few people going.

In short, stock class is un-fixable. we just need higher #'s to keep it alive. Im not sure that is possible

User avatar
Reijo Silvennoinen
Posts: 308
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 11:30 am
Club: CASOC
Car#: 60
Location: Calgary, Alberta

Re: SCCA Solo Class Article/Discussion

Post by Reijo Silvennoinen » Mon May 09, 2011 9:54 am

Maybe the improving economy will help the stock classes? I'm assuming most newbies come at the stock or near-stock level.

I'm also assuming and hoping the economy down there is finally improving! It is certainly doing pretty good up here!

R
Reijo
BS - CASOC
"It's what you learn after you know it all that counts." - Earl Weaver
http://www.RASEInc.net" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Tom Denham
Posts: 603
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 11:26 am
Club: PSCC
Car#: 237

Re: SCCA Solo Class Article/Discussion

Post by Tom Denham » Mon May 09, 2011 11:48 am

How about keeping R's and making some adjustment to whats allowed in stock, maybe front AND rear bars, or one or the other, I do know something has to change.

Post Reply