Cal Club Autocross Forums

solo only:
http://scca.cdn.racersites.com/prod/ass ... l-solo.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

full thing:
http://www.scca.com/assets/13-fastrack-april.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

bye bye RT...

hello Street class.

Marshall Grice wrote:bye bye RT...

hello Street class.

Bye bye Stock class and hello Street class.

Ok, I like it.

13.Street Category

The one thing to watch is: 13.8A Standard...Springs

This will be fun to police.

I will have the first HIST2 car ready to go with these mods. I have the big bar for the rear and will just need the camber plates for the front.

Is it 2014 yet?

So who's going to be the first guy to install 2" swaybars f/r?

Also how do you police camber plates that allow caster adjustment which also changes suspension geometry? NM finished reading the camber rule, I guess additional caster is allowed.

Marshall Grice wrote:bye bye RT...

hello Street class.

:gpower:

I have to say, i'm actually quite impressed. the swaybar and camber changes alone will effectively eliminate all of the wiz-bang shocks as you no longer have to rely on shocks that are valved insanely stiff to manage your crappy camber and handling balance.

all in all, sounds like a fair trade for giving up the R-comps. other than pissing off everyone that already owns the blingy shocks.


I predict the evo will get moved to SS. LOL

Marshall Grice wrote:I have to say, i'm actually quite impressed. the swaybar and camber changes alone will effectively eliminate all of the wiz-bang shocks as you no longer have to rely on shocks that are valved insanely stiff to manage your crappy camber and handling balance.

all in all, sounds like a fair trade for giving up the R-comps. other than pissing off everyone that already owns the blingy shocks.


I predict the evo will get moved to SS. LOL

No. Straight to SSP where it belongs! Is there an XSSP (for "Extra")?

Wow. Wheel sizes, camber plates, no remotes but can still use doubles and two years of screwing around with tire changes. So the perception is saving a few dollars on tires, but spend it now in other places.

Good luck with the interpretations of 13.5.A.4 when you are giving people camber plates. You no longer even have the stock point of reference once towers get hacked up for plates. It will be easy to get the shock within the 1" and still play with stack height to change travel. ;)

No piggyback or remote shocks... But $4k doubles will still be ok. What did they fix here? If you are going to screw with the shock rules at least make a change. Do cars that previously had remotes and holes in the body need to be crushed when the allowance for the holes goes away in 2015?

Spend 2014 setting up a car to one grade of tire, just to start over in 2015? Just pull the band-aid, its going to get a staph infection anyway.

Jason Isley BS RX8 wrote: Wow. Wheel sizes, camber plates, no remotes but can still use doubles and two years of screwing around with tire changes. So the perception is saving a few dollars on tires, but spend it now in other places.

Good luck with the interpretations of 13.5.A.4 when you are giving people camber plates. You no longer even have the stock point of reference once towers get hacked up for plates. It will be easy to get the shock within the 1" and still play with stack height to change travel. ;)

No piggyback or remote shocks... But $4k doubles will still be ok. What did they fix here? If you are going to screw with the shock rules at least make a change. Do cars that previously had remotes and holes in the body need to be crushed when the allowance for the holes goes away in 2015?

Spend 2014 setting up a car to one grade of tire, just to start over in 2015? Just pull the band-aid, its going to get a staph infection anyway.

+1

Today newbie shows up and gets dusted because his stock car does not have "race" rubber and remote shocks - of course has nothing to do with the fact they are new.

In 2014 newbie gets dusted because they don't have camber plates, both swaybars upgraded, optimized gearing by tire diameter change, double adjustable non-remote shocks - still cant drive.

Did the perceived "barrier" get better or worse?

And I see no camber allowance for A arm cars in there, how is that a better balance than what we have now? OK A arm guys had their fun, now everyone else gets help. :unimpressed:

Jason Isley BS RX8 wrote: Wow. Wheel sizes, camber plates, no remotes but can still use doubles and two years of screwing around with tire changes. So the perception is saving a few dollars on tires, but spend it now in other places.

Good luck with the interpretations of 13.5.A.4 when you are giving people camber plates. You no longer even have the stock point of reference once towers get hacked up for plates. It will be easy to get the shock within the 1" and still play with stack height to change travel. ;)

No piggyback or remote shocks... But $4k doubles will still be ok. What did they fix here? If you are going to screw with the shock rules at least make a change. Do cars that previously had remotes and holes in the body need to be crushed when the allowance for the holes goes away in 2015?

Spend 2014 setting up a car to one grade of tire, just to start over in 2015? Just pull the band-aid, its going to get a staph infection anyway.

yeah in relation to tire. i guess no more rs-3 starting in 2015

I'm wondering how bad ST and SP are going to get hosed because of this change? I can see quite a few underprepped ST/SP cars downgrading to Street.

Highlights include the use of high performance street tires (140 treadwear in 2014, 200 treadwear in 2015), a reduction in the shock absorber allowance (2 adjustments, no remote reservoirs beginning in 2015), an opening of the camber allowance (additional camber allowed via camber plates, camber bolts, and slotted struts), an opening of the wheel allowance (OE diameter plus or minus 1”), and an opening of the swaybar allowance (changes permitted to both bars). These changes are proposed as a way to make the category more relevant to today’s cars and today’s enthusiasts, while keeping the core concepts of vehicles that are easy to prepare and easy to live with in normal street usage. You will also notice that we changed the name from “Stock” to “Street”. This change reflects the fact that these cars aren’t actually as delivered off the showroom floor, something that has caused confusion in the past.


sums it pretty much

My dumb phone can't open the link. Sorry can someone please copy/paste just the solo part?

Ken Motonishi wrote:My dumb phone can't open the link. Sorry can someone please copy/paste just the solo part?

its a really big file.
copy and paste the entire thing?? O.O

i couldn't open it on my phone either. and my comp at work only supports on IE. chrome FTL!

Jason Isley BS RX8 wrote: Good luck with the interpretations of 13.5.A.4 when you are giving people camber plates. You no longer even have the stock point of reference once towers get hacked up for plates. It will be easy to get the shock within the 1" and still play with stack height to change travel. ;)

i don't see any allowance for 'hacking up the towers". it seems pretty straight forward to lay a stock strut next to any aftermarket one and compare the extended length. The camber plates or strut towers aren't even involved in that measurement.

Jason Isley BS RX8 wrote: No piggyback or remote shocks... But $4k doubles will still be ok. What did they fix here? If you are going to screw with the shock rules at least make a change. Do cars that previously had remotes and holes in the body need to be crushed when the allowance for the holes goes away in 2015?

it does seem excessive to create an entire new classification (limited prep) just to handle remote reservoir shocks when you're still allowing big dollar shocks in the regular class. It kind of screws up the progression between classes also. instead of buying a nice set of shocks once and being able to use them in any class now you have to buy expensive street legal shocks only to buy different expensive ones if you move up a class. i don't see this shock restriction having any cost saving or performance limiting effect. It just hides the perception of superiority from the newbs. nevermind many people already have sunk the cost of buying shocks that will now be illegal and pissing them off for no reason.

Ken Motonishi wrote:My dumb phone can't open the link. Sorry can someone please copy/paste just the solo part?

lol, use a computer.

or try this. it covers most of the interesting bits.
http://www.solomatters.com/2013/03/stre ... explained/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Jason Isley BS RX8 wrote: And I see no camber allowance for A arm cars in there, how is that a better balance than what we have now? OK A arm guys had their fun, now everyone else gets help. :unimpressed:

how many double a-arm cars are camber limited? how many are still camber limited when you can change both sway bars?

there are also no camber allowances for solid axle cars...but do they need any?

Bobby Beyer wrote:So who's going to be the first guy to install 2" swaybars f/r?

sweet

Marshall Grice wrote: i don't see any allowance for 'hacking up the towers". it seems pretty straight forward to lay a stock strut next to any aftermarket one and compare the extended length. The camber plates or strut towers aren't even involved in that measurement.

It will be easy to push the top mounting point of the strut up relative to stock when you get a camber plate/alternative top. I did this very thing with my road race car in the last year; did not want to rebuild the shock again, so we just changed the stack height. Doing this keeps the shocks within the length, but still gives you the benefit of "travel change".

Marshall Grice wrote: how many double a-arm cars are camber limited? how many are still camber limited when you can change both sway bars?

there are also no camber allowances for solid axle cars...but do they need any?

Both my C4 Corvette and RX-8 would have been faster with more front camber.

Jason Isley BS RX8 wrote:

Marshall Grice wrote: i don't see any allowance for 'hacking up the towers". it seems pretty straight forward to lay a stock strut next to any aftermarket one and compare the extended length. The camber plates or strut towers aren't even involved in that measurement.

It will be easy to push the top mounting point of the strut up relative to stock when you get a camber plate/alternative top. I did this very thing with my road race car in the last year; did not want to rebuild the shock again, so we just changed the stack height. Doing this keeps the shocks within the length, but still gives you the benefit of "travel change".

you can already increase the preload by an inch, how much benefit do you get by going beyond that when you can change your roll stiffness to what ever you want? I'm not sure i see a zero droop setup as a "benefit" in solo.

Jason Isley BS RX8 wrote:

Marshall Grice wrote: how many double a-arm cars are camber limited? how many are still camber limited when you can change both sway bars?

there are also no camber allowances for solid axle cars...but do they need any?

Both my C4 Corvette and RX-8 would have been faster with more front camber.

they would both be faster with stiffer bars. the static camber is mostly irrelevant when you can pick your roll stiffness.

i would argue that both would be faster with using the same static camber setting and stiffer bars than the same bars and more static camber.

This stock proposal truly makes me ill. When I started in 1993 the stock class rules were very much what they are today (less the new rear bar allowance :unimpressed: ) now toss them out and largely start over due to stock "participation" concerns and "barriers" to entry. This is not the answer.

Based on the numbers from the national convention numbers are up as a whole. Yes, some classe have gotten smaller, want to fix that, stop adding new classes. If you need a new one to fill a demand drop an under-performing one, don't change a category.

Barriers to entry. What a joke. This is the little league mentality we have now, everybody needs a trophy and newbies have to be competitive the day they show up. Its a wonder anyone over 20 autocrosses. You would have thought we would have all been run off because they did not have novice ST classes for AT trans white RWD cars. Hard to imagine anyone coming back for an event when you had to run your bone stock car on street rubber in open class against the reigning national champion. But somehow it was still fun.