S197 Mustang in SCCA Solo: STX vs STU vs ESP?

[Whiskey11]

Letter written!

 

[Sky Render]

So would this eliminate the CAM class?

Sent from my toilet using Tapatalk

 

[dontlifttoshift]

No. This has absolutely nothing to do with CAM.

 

[modernbeat]

So would this eliminate the CAM class?

No, but it might mean that CAM is no longer the best fit for a car with lower arms and relocation brackets. A National-level class like STU or ESP might be a better fit.

 

[Boaisy]

So if this passes, I might start going back to SCCA. I haven't purposely been avoiding it this year, just ended up working on the days they have been holding events. Even if I get a chance to show up this year, I'll just run CAM since I'm more focused on the NASA classing.

 

[claudermilk]

Excellent! Letter sent (my first, but this got me off my butt). Get this through, give us enough rubber to have a hope of competitiveness, and maybe I won't have to hide in CAM for long. Plus, IIRC, the whole Watts link fiasco getting straightened out next year, and things are looking up.

 

[Whiskey11]

Excellent! Letter sent (my first, but this got me off my butt). Get this through, give us enough rubber to have a hope of competitiveness, and maybe I won't have to hide in CAM for long. Plus, IIRC, the whole Watts link fiasco getting straightened out next year, and things are looking up.

The watts linkage issue was fixed going into this year. You can replace your differential covers in ST/SP as of 1/1/14.

 

[claudermilk]

Even better. I was remembering 1/1/15 for some reason. That part is definitely coming for me, I just haven't decided which yet. It also is pending available budget.

 

[Whiskey11]

Even better. I was remembering 1/1/15 for some reason. That part is definitely coming for me, I just haven't decided which yet. It also is pending available budget.

There was some confusion in the FasTrack and "final proposal" to the SEB that certain modifications were going to be put off until 2015 because it fell on the same FasTrack as the "Street tires in Stock" nonsense IIRC. I asked for clarification and was told that Diff Covers and STU were legal come 1/1/14.

 

[dontlifttoshift]

Write letters guys, apparently there are more people against this than there should be. I don't know if they are just bitchin on the internet or serious but if they all write letters we may not get this.

 

[boardkat]

tagging onto this, i wrote another letter asking for STX reclass and 285/10" allowance for our cars. i truly believe that's the place best served with the side-benefit of actual competitiveness - STU is truly a "tilting at windmills" class, even with relo brackets, 315 tires, etc. i will gladly be the sacrificial lamb next season to prove it if the SEB listens. worst case, i've got a headstart on my eventual ESP build. best case, i slot right in with the ultra-competitive west-coast STX crew. win-win IMO. please consider writing letters expressing the same if you feel as i do, i'm getting sick of flogging a boat around in FS. i even made my AS nemesis (ryan otis) sea-sick when he rode along with me yesterday

 

[FullAhead]

I read through that thread on the sandbox and there seems to be a lot of discussion about it being a worthwhile rule change based on participation. With the point in our favor being that more people will playing they can have their relo-brackets.

Sorry but I don't see the relo brackets making one but of difference in ST participation overall. The biggest deterrent to ST and SP for myself and everyone I've talked to recently is the need for a quality coilover setup. It's been well documented on here that nobody is going to show up and do well in ST and beyond on a $800 set of Konis/Steeda Sports ramming off the bump-stops on every slalom.

I do think they should be allowed, it's pretty silly that you can do a $1000 torque arm but not $100 relo brackets given the spirit of ST. BUT, it's going to have nothing to do with what's going on at the pointy end of the sport. To that end, I can kind of see the point of "why bother?"

 

[Whiskey11]

I read through that thread on the sandbox and there seems to be a lot of discussion about it being a worthwhile rule change based on participation. With the point in our favor being that more people will playing they can have their relo-brackets.

Sorry but I don't see the relo brackets making one but of difference in ST participation overall. The biggest deterrent to ST and SP for myself and everyone I've talked to recently is the need for a quality coilover setup. It's been well documented on here that nobody is going to show up and do well in ST and beyond on a $800 set of Konis/Steeda Sports ramming off the bump-stops on every slalom.

I do think they should be allowed, it's pretty silly that you can do a $1000 torque arm but not $100 relo brackets given the spirit of ST. BUT, it's going to have nothing to do with what's going on at the pointy end of the sport. To that end, I can kind of see the point of "why bother?"

At the national level, it wont make a damn bit of a difference because the cars will never be competitive within the current framework and no one who is worth their salt as a driver is really willing to commit to a build. The one person who actually was closest jumped to ESP before leaving all together and never did anything Nationally in ST.

Then you have people such as myself who are best described as "hack" drivers trying to carry the idea forward.

Where this allowance makes the most sense is at the local level. And contrary to popular belief the local level is important because that is where all of your future National level competition comes from. This allowance, aside from fitting within the intent of ST extremely well, is aimed at retaining those people by placing them in a lower prep level class rather than having them raped by SM and CP cars that have very little in common with the street going version of the car.

But that is really too much to ask so I suggest we just stop asking and go to ESP. [/sarcasm]

 

[csamsh]

At the national level, it wont make a damn bit of a difference because the cars will never be competitive within the current framework and no one who is worth their salt as a driver is really willing to commit to a build. The one person who actually was closest jumped to ESP before leaving all together and never did anything Nationally in ST.

Then you have people such as myself who are best described as "hack" drivers trying to carry the idea forward.

Where this allowance makes the most sense is at the local level. And contrary to popular belief the local level is important because that is where all of your future National level competition comes from. This allowance, aside from fitting within the intent of ST extremely well, is aimed at retaining those people by placing them in a lower prep level class rather than having them raped by SM and CP cars that have very little in common with the street going version of the car.

But that is really too much to ask so I suggest we just stop asking and go to ESP. [/sarcasm]

Yup...good points. With these couple of allowances, and the watt's fix, you might see somebody completely build-out an S197 and give madarash a run for his....oh wait, nevermind, he took his ball and went home!!!

Anyway, I want to see a flared S197 that's gutted to SP regs, 345 A6's in back, 335 A6's in front, full suspension and all of that. That's now possible, where, before, no one in their right mind was going to go through everything to fully prep an ESP S197 because, after you got all your work done, you had either a severely compromised 3-link or had a torque arm, and your choice of only two watt's links. A "complete" and "uncompromised" build would now possible.

 

[kcbrown]

Anyway, I want to see a flared S197 that's gutted to SP regs, 345 A6's in back, 335 A6's in front, full suspension and all of that. That's now possible, where, before, no one in their right mind was going to go through everything to fully prep an ESP S197 because, after you got all your work done, you had either a severely compromised 3-link or had a torque arm, and your choice of only two watt's links. A "complete" and "uncompromised" build would now possible.

Frankly, I think it'll be very interesting to see how a properly set up UCA+LCA rear suspension compares with a torque arm setup. I'm very curious about which is going to prove to be better overall, and it sounds like these rules changes will make it possible for such a competition to take place.

 

[Mountain]

Letter written! I was very suprised (in a very good way) to see this in the July FastTrack!

 

[Boaisy]

So SCCA this weekend is at Memphis International Raceway for the Auto-X, and it is usually fun to setup there for any club. However, this was the participation for today (I can't go due to work this weekend):

I'm not seeing any ponies. :/

 

[csamsh]

16 entries?!?! That looks...expensive...depending on where that event was held.

We've got 8 in just CAM for tomorrow, and we usually pick up a couple more that didn't preregister.

 

[Boaisy]

I think events at MIR ends up being $600+? I just know it is double, almost triple, the cost vs. the Millington Jetport we also use.

 

[csamsh]

Looks like CAM is in for Nationals...too bad I'm not driving a C5 Z06 with lots of power and big tires!!!

http://www.scca.com/news/index.cfm?cid=51948