Cal Club Autocross Forums

KJ Christopher wrote: All this coming from someone who would like to see stock classes on street tires, with appropriate class shuffling.

They should just make a ballot and hand it out at nationals to all the stock competitors asking if they'd rather run on street or DOT-Rs. Any class that has a majority saying street, switches to street.

Has any such poll/vote of only national level stock competitors ever been taken?

Jeff Stuart wrote:Any class that has a majority saying street, switches to street.

Yes, because the new people to the sport take one look at our classing structure and understand it immediatly, so it's ok to add that extra complication }:)

Jeff Stuart wrote: They should just make a ballot and hand it out at nationals to all the stock competitors asking if they'd rather run on street or DOT-Rs. Any class that has a majority saying street, switches to street.

Has any such poll/vote of only national level stock competitors ever been taken?

If you were to do a ballot at Nationals you will likely see the results heavily against it... The people who are at Nationals have already accepted the rules they have to work with. And when you say "switches to street [tires]", are you saying at the event? Now I need to bring fresh race and ST tires with me to nationals - in addition to my practice and rain tires. }:) Or do I have to change to SP because you took a pole and I did not have ST tires with me?

There is already a system in place for members to provide feedback, http://www.sebscca.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;.

You guys crack me up.

Of course they wouldn't switch for that event... that would be stupid. I meant for the next year.

And fine, if a majority of all the stock competitors want it, then all stock classes change. I only stated it that way because it would have a better chance if it was class by class, since none of the SS/AS guys will want street tires.

How about nothing changes and they just take the vote anyways, so people can stop guessing what the current national level competitors want, and instead we can just know. I see a lot of stock competitors saying they would rather be on street tires, I'm just trying to figure out how many of those people there actually are.

Jeff Stuart wrote:You guys crack me up.

Of course they wouldn't switch for that event... that would be stupid. I meant for the next year.

And fine, if a majority of all the stock competitors want it, then all stock classes change. I only stated it that way because it would have a better chance if it was class by class, since none of the SS/AS guys will want street tires.

How about nothing changes and they just take the vote anyways, so people can stop guessing what the current national level competitors want, and instead we can just know. I see a lot of stock competitors saying they would rather be on street tires, I'm just trying to figure out how many of those people there actually are.

That was not reflected in your post, you said a vote would be taken and the class would change.

So whats wrong with the current system that is in place for member feedback? Is the website to difficult and time consuming? Why would you only want a few hundred people that are at the event to vote? And as a point of reference for you, as I don't think you have been... About 10% of people at Nationals bother to show up at the SEB town hall, so getting a "majority" of one categories competitors to vote on anything at the event is unlikely. I don't think the club gets more than a few hundred responses to the post event survey, so you are only setting yourself up for failure with this plan.

The lack of action on the part of ST-stock supporters using the current feedback system tells me just how small this group is.

Michael Wood wrote:I'm not going to get into this debate, as it is circular and I think it unlikely that anything new will surface.

I see what you did there...

Jason Isley BS RX8 wrote:

Jeff Stuart wrote:You guys crack me up.

Of course they wouldn't switch for that event... that would be stupid. I meant for the next year.

And fine, if a majority of all the stock competitors want it, then all stock classes change. I only stated it that way because it would have a better chance if it was class by class, since none of the SS/AS guys will want street tires.

How about nothing changes and they just take the vote anyways, so people can stop guessing what the current national level competitors want, and instead we can just know. I see a lot of stock competitors saying they would rather be on street tires, I'm just trying to figure out how many of those people there actually are.

That was not reflected in your post, you said a vote would be taken and the class would change.

So whats wrong with the current system that is in place for member feedback? Is the website to difficult and time consuming? Why would you only want a few hundred people that are at the event to vote? And as a point of reference for you, as I don't think you have been... About 10% of people at Nationals bother to show up at the SEB town hall, so getting a "majority" of one categories competitors to vote on anything at the event is unlikely. I don't think the club gets more than a few hundred responses to the post event survey, so you are only setting yourself up for failure with this plan.

The lack of action on the part of ST-stock supporters using the current feedback system tells me just how small this group is.

Actually we have the ability to force people to answer a poll. MotorsportReg allows you to create conditional event questions so that only those you want to vote will see it and you can make it a required question so it must be answered in order to continue the registration process. Not saying you should, only that you can. It was a simple way to collect shirt sizes for the divisional.

KJ Christopher wrote:They are looking at evidence that suggests there isn't a market for the class.

Here's one of my big questions: what evidence? Is it based purely on the number of letters the SEB gets, as Jason seems to suggest? Are they looking at the national-style events that have allowed SK competitors? Has there ever been an effort to really find out, like a poll or something? Looking at this from my marketing perspective, if this was a product, you'd have a hard time even getting it to market without first knowing what your customers want. This and my first experience writing a letter to the SEB are why I am cynical. Luckily I'm also stubborn and annoying.

Kurt ... did you see this thread from a couple of months ago ... note the link in the opening message to a National discussion on this topic:

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=5431

... Mako, back to loving R tires for Track Days, and looking forward to my first set of real slicks

Kurt Ra wrote:

KJ Christopher wrote:They are looking at evidence that suggests there isn't a market for the class.

Here's one of my big questions: what evidence? Is it based purely on the number of letters the SEB gets, as Jason seems to suggest? Are they looking at the national-style events that have allowed SK competitors? Has there ever been an effort to really find out, like a poll or something? Looking at this from my marketing perspective, if this was a product, you'd have a hard time even getting it to market without first knowing what your customers want. This and my first experience writing a letter to the SEB are why I am cynical. Luckily I'm also stubborn and annoying.

I seem to remember having gotten questions about street tires in national scca surveys.

So...we have one data point being referenced here, the SK1/SK2 classes and a recent divisional...

Take a look at entries for the next Tour event offering a street tire index class (2...not percent, two) and normal, r-comp stock classes (30% of entry), Packwood...

Then get back to me

That's why I keep pointing to the National Street Tire Challenge events as a meaningful data point, as they are the only events, with SCCA support/contingency/visibility, we currently have to gauge broad based interest in this idea. Not perfect, but at least a data point that shows how "serious" people are...I'd certainly expect, if there really is grass roots level support, it would be reflected in blow the doors off type attendance. My guess is the only event that draws anything close to a normal Tour is Milwaukee, the region that started the series. It would be nice, in many ways, to be wrong, however...

Jason Isley BS RX8 wrote:There is already a system in place for members to provide feedback, http://www.sebscca.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;.

I even have it linked on the right-hand side navigation bar on our main Solo2.com site.

I don't have a dog in this fight (and wouldn't mind ST tires in Stock) but here's a perfect example of a "put-up or shut-up" scenario. STU class. When all the BMW M3s (E36 chassis) and the Subaru WRX STis, and the Mitsubishi Lancer EVOs had no street tire class to play, the SEB noticed this and after letters and campaigning they said "Okay...prove it...here's a supplemental class called STU - Street Touring Ultra". Guess what happened? First year it was a major hit. 2nd year as well and then...it's now a national class. I remember the first time it was a supplemental class at the SD Tour, everyone was exciting, shaking each other's hands wishing everyone luck. We had 25-27 cars just at the SD Tour. And by nationals it was I believe 30 then 45-47 when it became a national class.

So the saying "If you build it they will come" doesn't apply here. It's the opposite. "Come ... IN DROVES...and THEN we'll build it".

Giovanni Jaramillo wrote: I don't have a dog in this fight (and wouldn't mind ST tires in Stock) but here's a perfect example of a "put-up or shut-up" scenariou. STU class. When all the BMW M3s (E36 chassis) and the Subaru WRX STis, and the Mitsubishi Lancer EVOs had no street tire class to play, the SEB noticed this and after letters and campaigning they said "Okay...prove it...here's a supplemental class called STU - Street Touring Ultra". Guess what happened? First year it was a major hit. 2nd year as well and then...it's now a national class. I remember the first time it was a supplemental class at the SD Tour, everyone was exciting, shaking each other's hands wishing everyone luck. We had 25-27 cars just at the SD Tour. And by nationals it was I believe 30 then 45-47 when it became a national class.

So they saying "If you build it they will come" doesn't apply here. It's the opposite.. "Come ... IN DROVES...and THEN we'll build it".

Lets not leave out one very important piece of data... That first year STU ran heads up (at natls) within the BSP class. No PAX, no little league trophy's for everyone, they showed up and ran only to support the idea of a class. And it worked.

Jason Isley BS RX8 wrote:

Giovanni Jaramillo wrote: I don't have a dog in this fight (and wouldn't mind ST tires in Stock) but here's a perfect example of a "put-up or shut-up" scenariou. STU class. When all the BMW M3s (E36 chassis) and the Subaru WRX STis, and the Mitsubishi Lancer EVOs had no street tire class to play, the SEB noticed this and after letters and campaigning they said "Okay...prove it...here's a supplemental class called STU - Street Touring Ultra". Guess what happened? First year it was a major hit. 2nd year as well and then...it's now a national class. I remember the first time it was a supplemental class at the SD Tour, everyone was exciting, shaking each other's hands wishing everyone luck. We had 25-27 cars just at the SD Tour. And by nationals it was I believe 30 then 45-47 when it became a national class.

So they saying "If you build it they will come" doesn't apply here. It's the opposite.. "Come ... IN DROVES...and THEN we'll build it".

Lets not leave out one very important piece of data... That first year STU ran heads up (at natls) within the BSP class. No PAX, no little league trophy's for everyone, they showed up and ran only to support the idea of a class. And it worked.

Oh yeah that's right and I remember because before the supplemental class, locally here in Cal Club, all of us in BSP had a gentleman's agreement...no R-comps because we were all on street tires, and BSP was popular, and it was the pre-cursor to STU. Another example is F125. I heard the story of how unbelievably HARD it was to convince the SEB to allow karts in Solo. And eventually it became a national class and now we have kart classes based on age groups (FJA, FJB, FJC) before getting to the adult class (F125).

Okay, so no indices will be acceptable in any form, apparently. That pretty much eliminates the possibility of a compromise. Since they're not going to mirror every single stock class with a street tire counterpart, it sounds like the corner we're being backed into is make everyone in stock classes run on street tires or don't. Or as Jason says, "You can have my R-comps when you pry them out of my cold, dead hands." At some point this game is going to end in big, salty crocodile tears.

Giovanni Jaramillo wrote:I don't have a dog in this fight (and wouldn't mind ST tires in Stock) but here's a perfect example of a "put-up or shut-up" scenario. STU class. When all the BMW M3s (E36 chassis) and the Subaru WRX STis, and the Mitsubishi Lancer EVOs had no street tire class to play, the SEB noticed this and after letters and campaigning they said "Okay...prove it...here's a supplemental class called STU - Street Touring Ultra".

That's all I'm asking for: a legitimate chance to see whether the idea has legs or not. Create a supplemental class of some kind and let's see what actually happens, instead of trying to extrapolate meaningful information from meager, insufficient data. If it doesn't fly, no one will ever hear another word from me on the subject.

Kurt Ra wrote:

Giovanni Jaramillo wrote:I don't have a dog in this fight (and wouldn't mind ST tires in Stock) but here's a perfect example of a "put-up or shut-up" scenario. STU class. When all the BMW M3s (E36 chassis) and the Subaru WRX STis, and the Mitsubishi Lancer EVOs had no street tire class to play, the SEB noticed this and after letters and campaigning they said "Okay...prove it...here's a supplemental class called STU - Street Touring Ultra".

That's all I'm asking for: a legitimate chance to see whether the idea has legs or not. Create a supplemental class of some kind and let's see what actually happens, instead of trying to extrapolate meaningful information from meager, insufficient data. If it doesn't fly, no one will ever hear another word from me on the subject.

As Jason corrected above, they all ran with street tires in BSP to prove they had numbers before they got the supplemental class. You need to rally troops to do the same.

Just to make it completely clear, was the "STU cars running in BSP on street tires" plan handed down from the SEB as a proposal / challenge, or was it organized by the interested competitors? How did the STU participants communicate their participation? A note in the sponsor field? Or was there an option to check the STU class when they registered for Nationals?

John Stimson wrote:Just to make it completely clear, was the "STU cars running in BSP on street tires" plan handed down from the SEB as a proposal / challenge, or was it organized by the interested competitors? How did the STU participants communicate their participation? A note in the sponsor field? Or was there an option to check the STU class when they registered for Nationals?

As I recall it was an option offered, they didn't just show up and do it on their own.

John Stimson wrote:How did the STU participants communicate their participation?

It was partially word of mouth here in the SoPac region. STU guys in Cal Club, contacted STU guys in SD region, and word spread up to SF region as well. It was truly a "grassroots" uprising. And for the BMW crowd, Bimmerforums.com had a major thread supporting STU.

Giovanni Jaramillo wrote:It was partially word of mouth here in the SoPac region.

What I meant was, when they did show up at nationals, how did the SEB know who was part of the STU group?

John Stimson wrote:

Giovanni Jaramillo wrote:It was partially word of mouth here in the SoPac region.

What I meant was, when they did show up at nationals, how did the SEB know who was part of the STU group?

I think it was 2005-2006 when STU was a supplemental class. As to HOW the SEB knew, perhaps what Craig mentioned (there must've been an option declaring STU). Not sure so don't quote me.

As I remember, there was an article or two in SportsCar, maybe even something in Fastrack (still included within SportsCar at that time)informing people of the option. It was well publicized by SCCA. I'm not saying the origin of the concept wasn't grassroots, but there was quite a bit of publicity by the SCCA to enter the sub class within BSP at nationals that year. People didn't just show up out of the blue.

Well, street tire folks...do you think if you get all of your compatriots to come to nationals and run street tires in the stock classes, that could could get enough people there to outnumber the people on DOT-Rs? That may be what has to happen in order to have the SAC and the SEB really take a serious look at the idea of changing stock to 140 treadwear tires.

John Stimson wrote:That may be what has to happen in order to have the SAC and the SEB really take a serious look at the idea of changing stock to 140 treadwear tires.

But this is different than what happened for STU. The possibilities of STU were already on the table from SCCA. That hasn't been extended to the STOCK - street tire proponents. Additionally STU was an additional class, the Street tire proponents are for a change in an existing class. Apples and Oranges.