licensing fees for TT

[AlanB]

SU is interesting. Obviously TT isn't drawing super deep entry lists, but I think that this class could turn into a 'spec' 7 clone class with the current rules...... which is why the clones are (or were? Ive been gone awhile) specifically excluded when they setup the XP a/x class. I only mention this as clarifying the ruleset was brought up. I'd like to play in SU and still might. Nothing against the clones as they are almost always the right tool for the job, but I'd like to see a wide variety of competitive cars, such as Ricky's v8 swapped 240.

[kilgojr]

Here is what my thoughts always were for SU when Mark and I started pushing for rule changes:

A class for STREET cars, no kit cars or tube frame cars, that have any drivetrain mods as long as they are considered the same as what they started (RWD stays RWD, AWD stays AWD, FWD stays FWD). Basically we wanted a class where you could bring your swapped or highly modified street car, that is built for the track/hillclimb. This would mean that you have to have a glass front window, a dash (of some sort, not a completely gutted car), and you have to utilize DOT tires.

The problem I always had with Street Mod was that you couldn't really do a motor swap, and you had to leave the A pillar to C pillar (firewall to bulkhead) intact as factory. This always made it VERY difficult to prep for hillclimb with a full cage. If I wanted to build a highly modified, motor-swapped street car, then I was pushed into STO where I would have to compete with a tube frame car running bias ply slicks.

In reality, when Time Trials is struggling to get participants to fill classes and you see ONE class that consistently has 6 to 8 competitors, you need to pay attention and understand that this class is doing it right. Time Trial/Time Attack/ whatever you want to call it is now considered a HIGHLY growing sport. We need to pay attention to what other groups like Global Time Attack/Redline Time Attack/or NARRA are doing and make a similar class. Those groups all have an UNLIMITED class that still MUST be based on a street car, run street DOT tires, and allow all kind of motor swaps. I understand that there need to be a few clarifications and the possibility of a STREET LIMITED class, but I don't think we need to destroy the good thing we have built with Street Unlimited.

[MCMM3]

I really like the idea of a Street Limited class, at the end of the day our current SU car is just a gutted E36 M3 with a cage. It has a stock drive train from the MAF to the exhaust ports, then stock trans, diff and suspensions. Our car is really just built for safety with the full cage and has upgraded suspension components and brakes.

The change of the steering wheel and losing the interior puts us out of Street Prepared Solo classes, I think we would fit F Prepared Solo but Prepared classes don't fit into TT, but we are a long way from being a Street Unlimited car.

[AlanB]

SU isn't broken and definitely doesn't need to be thrown away or regulated to death. Keep the 'anything goes' philosophy and establish a minimum weight, prolly somewhere near 2200 or 2300 pounds and call it a day. Most Atom or Clone or whatever other 'ringer' car owner wont want to ballast enough to comply.

MCMM3, I understand that the car is technically streetable, and you are at a disadvantage in SU because of the stock driveline/power level. When I think of SU I think of driveline -modified cars, either turbo/super charged or engine swapped..... would your car fit better into the IT category? Are you running something that eliminates that option? Perhaps the M pkg does. I don't know the IT rules that well. Are the Showroom Stock classes still an option?

[zukitek]

SU isn't broken and definitely doesn't need to be thrown away or regulated to death. Keep the 'anything goes' philosophy and establish a minimum weight, prolly somewhere near 2200 or 2300 pounds and call it a day. Most Atom or Clone or whatever other 'ringer' car owner wont want to ballast enough to comply.

MCMM3, I understand that the car is technically streetable, and you are at a disadvantage in SU because of the stock driveline/power level. When I think of SU I think of driveline -modified cars, either turbo/super charged or engine swapped..... would your car fit better into the IT category? Are you running something that eliminates that option? Perhaps the M pkg does. I don't know the IT rules that well. Are the Showroom Stock classes still an option?

Alan the funny thing is that even though Mike and Suzee keep pumping up my ego....they ....in their "disadvantaged "car have managed to whip my butt last couple outings . Mike whipped me at Barber and Suzee whipped us both at TGPR.
Im not trying at all to say that the philosophy of the class is bad .

I am just now learning for myself that there is a philosophy. I was in the middle of moving from RE to member at large when this happened and I went with it .

[MCMM3]

Alan the funny thing is that even though Mike and Suzee keep pumping up my ego....they ....in their "disadvantaged "car have managed to whip my butt last couple outings . Mike whipped me at Barber and Suzee whipped us both at TGPR.
Im not trying at all to say that the philosophy of the class is bad .

I am just now learning for myself that there is a philosophy. I was in the middle of moving from RE to member at large when this happened and I went with it .

Too Funny. I think the tracks make a big difference to us. At a place like Road Atlanta or others where there are long straights and a slow turn onto some like #7 at RA that is where I think the M3 is disadvantaged. At a place like Barber and TGRP it is probably closer. Have never driven this car at RRR so don't know how that will be with that long straight. Last year there was also a modified WRX in the class that was handing everyone their ass, can't recall the modifications but I know it had quite a few things and we were all gunning for second place then. Ricky is right I've gotta keep the talk going, its racing!

I really don't want to modify the drivetrain as I like the car as it is, it's about 225-230 rwhp. The SCCA basically has no place for this car in Club racing, It is beyond ITS and ITR and if put on 8" wheel it goes into SPU as I recall but if you go that route you need quite a car to compete. I wish there was one more level of IT(?) for the M3 and some other cars especially given how many folks track these cars.

Honestly the best place for this car is NASA in GTS probably falls into GTS3 or so but could easily go up or down. But I've started this with the SCCA, I like the crowd and don't want to change.

[farrout]

SU was set up to be a "run what you brung" with a minimal set of rules. That has been its value. It has been one of our most popular classes. In 2013, there were 17 drivers in SU with 37 entries. CSP had 23 drivers and 46 entries. Next closest class had less than half of SU drivers/entries.

The thought about a minimum weight is a consideration but you have to remember that only our TT events at RA or Roebling or Barber have a set of scales available. In my 10 years of running TT here, I have never seen a car weighed.

"If it ain't broke, don't fix it" is a good thought. We do not need to create more TT classes. If you choke down SU and exclude some cars, you have to think about where they will be able to run and offer a solution.

BUT, if you really feel that something needs to be fixed there is an avenue. ALSCCA has a member of the SEDIV TT Committee. Write up what you think the SU rules set should be. Have Mark K submit it to the SEDIV TT Committee for discussion/approval.

Here are the current classes we have in the Championship:
GCR Classes: FA, FB, FC, FE, FF, FV, FM, F5/6, ASR, P1, P2, SRF, STU, STL, GT1, GT2, GT3, GTL, AS, EP, FP, HP, T1, T2, T3, T4, ITA, ITB, ITC, ITR, ITS, SM, B Spec
Regional/TT Classes: SPECIAL (SP), V-O, V-C, SPO, SPU, GTA, IT7, IT7R, ITO, SU, FS, FST, CF, LC, SM5
SOLO Classes: SSP, ASP, BSP, CSP, DSP, ESP, FSP (every SOLO Car moves into its xSP class)

The advantage of TT is that although you can run a GCR/Regional Race car, you can also run a SOLO based car without having to meet all the GCR BS.

[Fusion Works]

Save SU, leave it as a catch all for anything that doesn't fit else where. Where else could you see a turbo Miata, a Miata with an LS, a 240 with an LS, and Celica with a big turbo, Civic with a turbo, etc. You get all kinds of different cars that show up.

"Run what you brung and hope you brung enough." Why would I want to build a Civic or Miata that has to be ballasted up to 2300lbs? Who cares if an Atom/Clotus shows up? When I was running SM there was a Locost Seven that ran and I didn't complain. He was faster, but it wasn't because he had no windshield wipers. TT isn't just about winning one event, you have to win them all to win the Championship.

One cool thing with the heavily modified cars, they break with regular frequency. That means each event requires all the drivers to be on their game to get their shot up front.

[zukitek]

K looking at the direction this thread has taken...lets reel it in a bit back to why I started whining.

The seat has been discussed and as posts show ....the seat I installed is a boat anchor once the certification expires as the rules are presently written in the GCR. Im now OK with that after seeing all of the angles. The class I run the car in is really a matter of choice . If I dislike the rules in the class I can always prepare the car to do something else. I enjoy very much the class I run with. For the record ...I will always prepare my car to run with as many other cars/drivers as possible . Why would one want to compete in a 1 car class?

Scott (subaru) didnt have much more car than any of us had . He was just that guy. ....Alan Branch , Alan McCrispin, Scott , etc are guys that just come show up and are just frickin phenoms that are fast no matter what . They are out there . They outdrive us and we have to suck it up and know that we just got outdriven.

my contention is that we need a biannual renewal option for TT licensing with some credit given for level of participation and the SU class rules need a little more transparency in the safety preparation area so that guys know what they are in for coming in .

[JohnW8]

Alan Branch, Alan McCrispin, Scott Budalisch. Just sayin'.

[Fusion Works]

I have talked to a person heavily involved with the Safety side of SCCA. He mentioned some interesting things about the seat issue. SCCA recognizes FIA specs for seats, however they do not recognize the FIA "retirement" of said seats. That means even though your seat "expires" in the eyes of FIA, SCCA doesn't care. Just like Window nets which have an expiration date, SCCA chooses not to recognize that. Based on our conversation, FIA seats expire, but SCCA doesn't recognize that. No need to back brace your FIA seat, EVER. (as long as it isn't mounted on sliders).

Now the slider debate, years ago at the Runoffs, there was a showroom stock racer that went through tech with a stock seat mounted on stock rails. The official who has been railroading the slider debate, saw this floppy poorly mounted seat and from then on has made it his mission in life to get rid of adjustable seat sliders. Even went as far as having a "conversation" with Recaro over the marketing of their, at the time, FIA seat sliders. Recaro shortly removed the FIA approved labeling on their sliders.

However if you crawl up under the FIA homologated Porsche Cup car seats you will find a set of Recaro or Sparco steel double locking seat sliders, exactly like the kind all the rest of us can buy. Since this official has made it his personal mission in life to "fix" the seat issues with SCCA, we are stuck with retarded seat rules. No other professional race organization has to operate this way. Look at the seats in most Grand AM, World Challenge, USTCC, etc they are all mounted on sliders with no seat back braces.

For now we are required to have back braces on seats with sliders, accept that until this official is off the safety board and then start writing letters to get this fixed.

[rodhx]

Thanks for the clarification Brett.

I'm thinking we can get faster action regarding the slider issue if we give Ricky that official's address and chip in to cover his travel expenses.

[nicktcr]

i'm thinking we can get faster action regarding the slider issue if we give ricky that official's address and chip in to cover his travel expenses.

lol

[zukitek]

LMAO... Ironically my backordered corbeau seat came in today. Its nice . Its a composite bucket with a much nicer more durable cover than the sparco seat I am removing .

I have lower odds of being in a life ending crash on a race track than I do on my commute to work so I am absolutely not scared of my stock seat sliders. Im going to mount this new seat on the same sliders and build an adjustable backbrace . This seat already has an exposed mounting point for the backbrace.

Now if we could just get SCCA to put out some specs on what they want the backbrace to be built like ...we would be good.

Chumpcar does have some pretty specific specs on how they want a backbrace to be done so I guess Ill go off of that .

[rodhx]

Just look at pics of the ioport brace and make something similar. It seems to be the standard.