Cal Club Autocross Forums

Rick Brown wrote:Who started this thread, anyway? Hmmm, first chance to compare the philosophies if the candidates...........

OK, who can field dress a Moostang?

Rick Brown wrote:

Sebastian Rios wrote:It looks like we are pretty much in agreement on CSM being limited to street tires.

Not with me. This idea completely goes against the concept of CSM, IMHO.

I thought CSM was the catch all the newbs class. I have yet to see a newb show up with A6/710's on a car and have it be modded out of SM/SM2 rules.

I thought CSM had decent participation until us race tired A-holes showed up in there and scared everyone off. Thus my opinion that participation would increase due to adding a street tire restriction on CSM.

Rick Brown wrote:Who started this thread, anyway? Hmmm, first chance to compare the philosophies if the candidates...........

Well, here's what I was thinking with my suggestion: I'm looking at this as an opportunity to create a class that's sole purpose it to increase competiton while lowering cost for many drivers. I'm not so sure we need another 'tweener' class, especially when that tweener class is fairly close to SP on street tires.

One sample I look at is San Diego's IS classes. These are stock/SP tweener classes that include race tires. IS2 (miatas) is especially popular IS1 (vette's) was popular at one time. But despite getting 10ish/event in IS2, only one or two show up to a national event. I'm thinking they've built to a false rule set that keeps them from gently progressing into an SCCA class.

Jay W

Sebastian Rios wrote:It looks like we are pretty much in agreement on CSM being limited to street tires.

Now what about a 2 seater STX/U class?
Jay pointed out that a prepped car for our local class would not have a place to go for National competition, but what about SP? They wouldn't necessarily be at the top of the heap, but would still be able to play at the tours and divisionals. Then later they have the option of going to SP in earnest.
I realize that the rules progression from ST to SP isn't completely linear, but the new brake rules get them closer. What else might a ST competitor have to "downgrade" to be legal in SP?

Wings, bumper covers and possibly some appearance items like side skirts or fake ducts.

Per October's fastrack the camber arm allowance for ST will be SP legal starting January 1st, as will brakes.

I'm really looking forward to Christine's suggestion.

Mike

Just gave it, but I figured it was enough in another direction to deserve it's own thread

Bob Beamesderfer wrote:

Rick Brown wrote:Who started this thread, anyway? Hmmm, first chance to compare the philosophies if the candidates...........

OK, who can field dress a Moostang?

Wi nøt trei a høliday in Sweden this yer?

See the løveli lakes

The wonderful telephøne system

And mani interesting furry animals

The Producers would like to thank The Forestry Commission
Doune Admissions Ltd, Keir and Cowdor Estates, Stirling
University, and the people of Doune for their help in the
making of this film.
The Characters and incidents portrayed and the names used
are fictitious and any similarity to the names, characters,
or history of any person is entirely accidental and
unintentional.
Signed RICHARD M. NIXON

Including the majestic møøse

A Møøse once bit my sister ...

No realli!

Can I take my own thread OT or is that verboten? ;)

Mike Simanyi wrote:Can I take my own thread OT or is that verboten? ;)

Since you are a moderator in this forum, you could move your own comments to the off topic section

Resident noob checking in with a couple points from the noob perspective.

1) I wouldn't concern myself with whether the class(es) we come up with port to nationals. If we're trying to get new blood, they're very unlikely to go the first year or two they compete...too expensive and too intimidating. And if they decide to continue autocrossing after a year or so, I'm thinking they'd use their learning experiences to buy and prep a car in a "real" class. I'd just develop the guidelines that best attract who we want to target/accommodate, and leave the nationals issue aside.

2) It sounds like the person we're trying to attract is the guy/gal that has done some minor tuning: maybe an intake, cat-back, shocks and bigger wheels/tires, and maybe has a friend or two they want to race against. I like Robert's suggestion of trying to make it all fit under one simple PAX (.975 or whatever). If that doesn't work (i.e. someone absolutely dismantles the competition), we could always look back at who brung what and revise/expand the plan as appropriate to bring it into line.

3) By the same token as 2, We may need to relax some of the rules regarding body kits, wings, interior enhancements, etc. I'm guessing that almost none of that stuff was bought to actually make the car faster or handle better (and in some cases, I'd say it'd do the opposite).

Mike Simanyi wrote: Wings, bumper covers and possibly some appearance items like side skirts or fake ducts.

Mike

Hmm, wings and side skirts can be a performance advantage. So why just fake ducts? There are many real and some effective ducts on the market.

Adding to what Kurt said, many body kits only add weight.

If there were a way to attract novices with modded cars and give them meaningful heads up competition (no index), that would be great. It is quite tough for a new person to grasp the index.

Marshall Grice wrote:

Rick Brown wrote:

Sebastian Rios wrote:It looks like we are pretty much in agreement on CSM being limited to street tires.

Not with me. This idea completely goes against the concept of CSM, IMHO.

I thought CSM was the catch all the newbs class. I have yet to see a newb show up with A6/710's on a car and have it be modded out of SM/SM2 rules.

I thought CSM had decent participation until us race tired A-holes showed up in there and scared everyone off. Thus my opinion that participation would increase due to adding a street tire restriction on CSM.

CSM had nothing to do with newbies. It came about for car that was in excess of SP rules. Put a Hemi in a Chevy, put Mopar in Ford, put a 502 in a Miata, put a sprint car wing atop of your car, etc. That's what CSM was started for.

IMHO keep CSM as is. Give anybody that wants to run street tires in CSM or SP, give them the .975 PAX factor instead of diluting the classes more unless that's your goal of lots of "I" classes and everybody wins because there is nobody else in the class. Hmmm lot's of classes not making the minimum class count would sure save money since there would be no trophies during the year or year end jackets.

Remember, if it ain't broke, don't f*^k with it.

Sorry Glenn, I have to disagree with you. CSM predates SM, SSM, SMF and XP (I think I have that FWD SM thing right) and, as such, is redundant.

Considering that and the call we had last year for a street tire version, we can make it a much more useful class for newbies who want to run against their buddies as well as those members who want to run an otherwise SM or SP car on street tires.

As for not messing with success, our reduced participation suggests we should focus on improving. Simply put, we're in the business of hosting events that provide value for our participants. We're selling a unique package of entertainment and adrenaline rush. We can - and will - do better, incorporating some of the ideas in this thread (and its related thread started by Christine.)

Even though I disagree with some of your comments, I appreciate you offering your opinion.

Mike

You should change the name of this thread to “Thoughts” or “PROPOSED CHANGES” or add a "?"
It looks like a real final change has been made.

Doug Teulie wrote:You should change the name of this thread to “Thoughts” or “PROPOSED CHANGES” or add a "?"
It looks like a real final change has been made.

Except that this is the Public Rules Discussion forum. If it was a done deal it'd be an announcment in Solo Talk, not open for comment.

Glenn Duensing wrote: I thought CSM was the catch all the newbs class.

Not how I remember it. Was intended for both. A place for newbies with strange mods and regulars that don't care to play in SCCA regulated classes. It was realized at the time that it could be a full local class with cars being preped specifically for it. How big is this demand for a street tire version really? Just a few people want it or bunches of them asking for it. Those newbies that come as a group to run against each other shouldn't care what other's in the class do, only how they fair against their friends.

Glenn Duensing wrote: IMHO keep CSM as is. Give anybody that wants to run street tires in CSM or SP, give them the .975 PAX factor instead of diluting the classes more unless that's your goal of lots of "I" classes and everybody wins because there is nobody else in the class...

Mike Simanyi wrote:Sorry Glenn, I have to disagree with you...Considering that and the call we had last year for a street tire version, we can make it a much more useful class for newbies who want to run against their buddies as well as those members who want to run an otherwise SM or SP car on street tires. Mike

do we really want to turn CSM into the new novice class or keep them 2 seperate classes? they may end up with alot of overlap in what's allowed, (basically everything), but so what. CSM is for those with experience that want to build without caring about national class rules. if the novices car fits in a class, use that index. if not and it's on street tires, give it the proposed CSM ST index. if it's on race tires no index.
also, novices have a way of not understanding what mods need to be disclosed. i've seen a number of cars where the owner didn't realize using factory parts from other models means it's not stock

Rick Brown wrote: How big is this demand for a street tire version really? Just a few people want it or bunches of them asking for it.

Last year Art wanted it and one other said that they might ran it.

I know that no "national" driver would build a true CSM car. There's no money or tire contracts to be won. We had a couple true CSM cars. Ron Brooks Camaro was one. My old Camaro is waiting on it's motor. It's cheaper than making my newer one a SP car. Motor, suspension, trailer and tow vehicle is more than I want to spend.

There's no reason to make CSM a "street" tire only class when we can add a index. Run it for a year or so and see. If there's a big demand, make it.

BTW, I think a "catch" all class for stock classes is a good idea. Give a choice of running either a combined class or stock class. Good for those single car classes that want competition.

All IMHO and YMMV

Simplifying things is good.
We seem to make this all too complicated just because we think we can.

Make CSM a street tire class and also make it the default novice class. This makes life so much simpler.

Robert Puertas wrote:Simplifying things is good.
We seem to make this all too complicated just because we think we can.

Make CSM a street tire class and also make it the default novice class. This makes life so much simpler.

Creating several new classes that have no path to SCCA is not a good idea unless we run a different series for profit or we want to give the street racers a place to run. IF CSMX is the run what you got on street tires class I think we have it covered. We want to attract new drivers to the sport. The sport is SCCA local class, Divisional, Tour and Nationals. CSMX is not going to help build SCCA classes but one odd class is better than several.

Running street tires in SCCA stock classes is interesting.

I'd also add to Doug's comment that it seems like the eventual goal is to wean the street racer noobs away from whatever class(es) we set up for them and at some point try to steer them into a regular class. If we offer too many classes, it's too easy to just keep running in the noob/street racer class or even possibly go from one noob class to another.

I would really like to see a CSM-SK class. About five years ago I took my stock Mustang and decided to put a Torque Arm suspension on it and went from FS to CP! A CSM-SK would be a nice middle ground. I have some new RE-01's I would like to flog.

Robert Puertas wrote:Simplifying things is good.
We seem to make this all too complicated just because we think we can.

Make CSM a street tire class and also make it the default novice class. This makes life so much simpler.

What happens when a street legal bike engined 7 clone comes in with DOT-R tires? A-Mod? That is really the only National class it's legal for(unless you built the chassis to B-Mod rules).

Earl Merz wrote:

Robert Puertas wrote:Simplifying things is good.
We seem to make this all too complicated just because we think we can.

Make CSM a street tire class and also make it the default novice class. This makes life so much simpler.

What happens when a street legal bike engined 7 clone comes in with DOT-R tires? A-Mod? That is really the only National class it's legal for(unless you built the chassis to B-Mod rules).

My initial reaction to this rare event would be to say "Hey, cool looking A-mod car. Might want to consider adding wings eventually, but have fun running it." He can still compare times to whatever he wants.

I think we will get far more street tire, tuner types than bike engined 7 clones. Although I'd love to see it.

And overall, my personal preference isn't to develop contingency plans for every possible outcome. I prefer a focused approach to solving issues. If we continue to advertise outside and keep the novice entrants up, the focus needs to be on accommodating that inflow.

I still don't see why CSM needs to be made a Street tire class. You can run whatever DOT legal tires you want in that class. I was under the impression that was what CSM was for. A class for a car that is able to be registered for street use and driven on DOT tires. Changing it to be a 140+ tread wear only class sucks in my opinion. But who knows, by the time my car is finished, Bike engine might be legal in DM again