Don't need to do it for the seasonal races, just the finals where everyone is thrown in together under 1 class.

The difficult things is that, are far as I can see, there is nothing that can or could have been done that would have made a difference in the results. Brian Hobaugh (6th) is the highest finishing Vintage competitor... If the newer cars had received zero design points... or Brian had received double design points... he would have finished 3rd but (I think) the results would feel contrived and it still wouldn't really have been close. Mike Maier (13th) would have needed triple design points to come out on top, as would Mark.

Mark has said on a couple of occasions that our Vintage cars simply can't defy the laws of physics - no matter how badly we want them to. Perhaps that is part of the solution...

In the absence of a Vintage or Pro-Touring Class maybe (aftermarket) aero could be banned (or assessed a catastrophic penalty) for cars later than 1990 while remaining open for cars 1989 and older. Aero would have to include wings, spoilers, and belly pans but would some how need to take OEM products into account. This would at least allow us to gain some ground.

But it wouldn't be a silver bullet.

Perhaps bonus points based on age? Regardless the solution, I don't want anything that makes the results seem contrived. Today we have a situation where the better cars and drivers won and/or placed higher - no question about it. It the rules were adjusted such that WE had an unfair advantage the series would deteriorate faster than you can imagine.

The style side of this has always been a question to most of us anyway. How can something like Brian's widebody Vette or Camaro finish behind a late model with wheels and maybe a bolt on wing. Its so subjective, one is so modified from the original factory design, and one is a factory car with some bolt ons. In the that case the style points should be awarded to car manufacturer not the owner, because nothing changed on the car except a few bolt ons.

Lets face it, there is nothing that can be done to make everyone happy. Someone will always feel that like some part of this isn't fair. Hey, I think its not fair that Danny and Mark can out drive me.

In the end, I don't think any of us want this to go away. And I think most of us agree that a thick rule book is not what we want either. I do like the pre and post what ever year we choose, and the 200 tread wear, because it somewhat levels the playing field. That would be enough for me. Lets keep building cool cars, and lets ride.

RonS for President! :flag2:

I personally don't like the idea of docking cars points for rollbars that are difficult to climb over, or seats that are difficult to get in. These items are safety related imho, these cars are to damn fast now to not have these things on a road course. I'm at the point with mine now where I'm backing out of the throttle down the straights at tracks like Vir because it badly needs aero to be safe at the speeds it's capable of.

Actually Ron, Brian's vette is not all that modified, other than the flares it's pretty much bolt on parts.

Tim, my test for modifications is: If it gives me wood when I see it, then its pretty modified. Brian's midyear, yeah wood.

I agree with you 100%

I don't understand when people say things like "if you have race seats and door bars to climb over then you should lose points in the judging portion"

I think the people who don't have at least a 4 point cage, harnesses and safer than stock seats properly installed; should be the ones who lose points for endangering themselves, sort of like a cop writing you a ticket for not wearing your belt.

There are definitely ways to integrate safety equipment into your car and keep the street functionality of it. There should be no excuses.

I can't believe people run the speed they do on the roadcourse and then justify the fact that they don't have those safety items in their car by saying things like "well my car is a street car and I use it a lot so I don't want a roll cage, harnesses and race seats"

Well, if you're attending events like the USCA puts on then you are using it for much more than just street driving. Whether it's cost, lack of understanding or just a mentality that a person wants to keep their car a "street car" I just don't understand how someone can justify putting themselves at risk.

TMI Not really interested in your erectile situation! :D :action-smiley-027:

......then that was a poor choice in which smiley to use.

Maybe they should use Ron's "meter" for the judging portion......

That is possible one of the most important contributions to this conversation. Nothing will hurt the series more than penalizing competitors for safety in order to satisfy spectators desire to prove how much of a street car these are.

At the end of the day we are out there driving running in these events because we want to - not because we have to - and we are pushing our cars, and ourselves, to satisfy our own desire to challenge ourselves and enjoy our car. Folks are not going to go that if they do not feel safe. There was a fair bit of talk at SEMA about the need for MORE safety equipment in the faster cars and how to ensure that we can all have fun, put on a good show, and be safe. For non-competitors to suggest that faster (or any) drivers should somehow put themselves at risk to be more "stock" is unrealistic and unfair.

Lol! you're probably right

I'm sorry -- but I get a chuckle out of the posts that suggest "the series will go away"....


People are racing to get in! AND they just DOUBLED the field to 100 from 50... This show was the biggest baddest show since the inception... with more sponsors and double the amount of competitors. So where does this idea come from that says if they don't change they won'd survive? WTF? Because "one of our guys" didn't win... the entire thing is a flop? LOL

It would look just like HellFire
Caged without being race car caged - stereo - big brakes - big motor - big G's.... and drive it from LA to Tampa and be happy doing it. LOL THAT is "Pro Touring".

Ron wrote the answer a couple pages ago, and it wouldn't be that hard to implement. After all is said and done, have a unlimited class, and several logical classes under it. That approach has worked great for the Hot Rod drag week competition. Their event sells out in a matter of minutes with over 300 cars attending. Spectators turn out at all the tracks, and the event is live broadcast on the net. Forget all the discussion about what makes a "streetable car" and go with the qualifier of if someone is willing to drive the damn thing on the street and it is legal, then it is OK for unlimited. If someone wants to build a silhouette 69 camaro with a F1 chassis under the bodywork, and is willing to drive it on the street, go for it. Everyone has a different personal version of what is streetable, and in the Hot Rod world there are guys willing to drive 1000 + miles in a week in a ProMod car with a funny car style cage, more power to them. Everyone loves the unlimited cars and their low 6 second 220+mph runs but there is also plenty of room for the average guy in a backyard built car running the daily driver class and everyone in between.

Throw the whole BS judging points out the window, this isn't figure skating. There is nothing gained from it.

You are never going to stop the advancement of technology, and there will always be someone with more money to spend. Embrace it and enjoy the ride.

I agree James, it seems to be the big elephant in the room and a line nobody wants to step over. Cages should be REQUIRED to run in the faster class. Most of, if not all (mine included) of the cars do not have enough cage in them to be safe considering how heavy these cars are and the speeds they're capable of.
I know it will probably get into a whole bunch of legal liabilities with certification.... etc, but I'm sure there will be a lawsuit if someone is injured badly or god forbid someone dies in a crash.
I don't care how good the driver is, things can happen on the track that you can't control. I had a guy in a Ferrari blow an engine right in front of me at corner 10 exit at Vir in the spring, I drove through oil at probably well over 100 mph and went off sideways through the grass, it could have been very bad had the ground been soft and the tires dug in.

I just started reading this thread. I'm suprised it took till page 13 for someone to bring up the topic of safety and discuss it. During the USCA days and GG events, the small tracks and slower speeds was not as big of an issue, now we are running big tracks at race car speeds without race car safety in alot of the cars competing. I think everyone has been extremely lucky that nothing catastrophic has happened yet. If is not a matter of "if", its a matter of "when".

This has always been a big concern of mine. A lot of these cars are very high horespower, not set up for track, drivers that arent expeirienced in a " race" environment and may push things too hard because they feel thats what their car and cababilities SHOULD be able to do. Things can go wrong very quick no matter who you are. Its going to have to be addressed.

"Non-Competitor" here... Im only stating my opinion as others are. My car will never have the style, fit, finish, or speed necessary to be competitive in any aspect of these events no matter what the rules are and Im fine with that. I just like to drive my car and do the best I can with what I have. What I do care about though is to continue seeing our segment thrive in these events. I believe there needs to be a class structure as you and others have defined already. In addition, I believe the streetcar aspects need to be emphasized more.

My thoughts on streetcar judging isnt for a car with safety equipment to be penalized but to provide more criteria to judge a cars true street friendliness. Its "Streetcar" challenge after-all. If you have to climb thru a cage in order to get in and out of a car, have limited visibility due to race seats, and cant effectively check your blind spots due to being harnessed in, then in my opinion it isnt very street friendly.

To address the other concern about going this fast without such safety items. Maybe we shouldn't be. In other organizations, you and your car have to qualify to go "XXX" speeds. Why not here? Can I take my car to Silver State and run 150 right out of the gate? Heck no. Can I run 10's in the 1/4? Nope. Can I run in the fastest group at a NASA event? Nah.

Now having said that, lets look again at the scenario. A street car scoring high in the Streetcar side likely doesnt qualify to do the speeds the more race oriented car can do. (Unless your Steilow and drive a car like Hellfire) Its a points tradeoff. Nobody said the Ultimate Streetcar has to be the absolute fastest.

Just some thoughts

Chris, have you ever been in a truly fast car on a big road course, not the little infield course we ran at TMS? I'm talking somewhere like Vir or Road America.
I bet if I put a stock seat and a 3 point belt in the passenger side and took out at Vir you wouldn't be able to stay in the seat.

You'll get no argument out of me on this. I fully agree. The point is, if all you have is a stock seat and 3 point belts, should you be allowed to go fast enough to get thrown out of the seat? That person showed up to the event to hang out, have a good time, and compete in a "Streetcar" event. This car is more Streetcar than the DSE White Monster Camaro but doesnt stand a chance against it. There's a 25 point spread allocated to the top so many cars for speed. If youre out of that range you get 1 point. Maybe we should award the points for the racing the same as the Style and Design event. Give 15 points for just for crossing the start/finish line and a possible 10 more based on how fast you can go. If the streetcar is not allowed to compete at the speeds of the Monster Camaro, should it be judged in the same group?

For the record, I have 6-point harness, seats, and plans to eventually add a roll bar. I still dont plan to drive 150 but at least I'll feel better about driving 100ish on a road course.

Last I checked this is a driving competition, right? If it wasn't then there wouldn't be 3 out of the 5 segments being performance based.
Some of what you've suggested penalizes a car with proper safety equipment in the name of what an opinion of a street car should be. Everyone has a tolerance level for what they want to put up with for extended driving.
I'm 100% against penalizing a car for safety related equipment, diluting the competition by giving the guy with the 3 point belt extra credit as a street car could chase away the properly prepared cars and then will it truly be the Ultimate Street Car?

TOTALLY AGREE!!!!

Glad you guys finally caught up :sarcasm_smiley:

Anyone ever tell you that self quoting is like speaking about yourself in the third person? :sarcasm_smiley: :D :D

It's kinda like a Self Selfie... or photobombing your own photo?!?! LOL

Yep. Pretty lame. Good thing I'm not a pro athlete ... :D

As Dave would say, "Next."

I think its time to lose the term Street car all together. We are starting to see the birth of Strace cars. Street legal Race cars. Lets not kid ourselves.

I remember when 700HP was a hard to reach goals, now its the norm.

Well dont leave us hanging. Exactly how will this new class be defined. We expect to see a definitive line drawn between the 2 categories. This will allow is to properly debate how it will be scored to give the "Stow" (street show) cars a fighting chance. :sarcasm_smiley:


The more we talk about it, the more I find myself thinking of Rons idea of an Unlimited class. AKA Strace Car.

Street/Race Cars unlimited and "all others"?? This gives you two classes... but would you still want to see an overall winner? That to me is where this class issue begins to breaks down. Hard to have "a" winner that anyone would be okay with... The discussion starts to come full circle in a us against them... because "we" can't win. "We" being Pro Touring.

Pro-Touring just isn't a large enough audience. They (USCA) struggled at every event to fill the spaces required. And as far as selling the TV show... the PT crowd just isn't all that well known (yet) or followed except by "us". WE think it's the greatest thing ever... But "We" are a few thousand people....

Don't get me wrong.... I have two race cars that I'd love to be able to run at these events. So I'd be happy to see a full on race car class - but then that's just selfish and has nothing to do with these events (which I've traveled 1000's of miles to support, since day one, without ever having a car in any of them).


My personal feeling is -- once you have definitions and classes... those with the skills / bank / desire - will find a way to trump all of the written rules... And what will that lead to? More expensive builds - cutting out more and more people that can't "compete". Then this whole thing would be super boring.

Looking at the sponsors from this year most of em sell to the muscle car crowd, doesn't it make sense to ad a class? Call it muscle car and put a year break in....done. No more rules just another class, the rules get refined every year, or at least the rule breakers get frowned upon:secret:
The other thing is the "PT" crowd needs to stop talking about it and go do it! I'd hate to see this turn into a tuner, AWD, new car series.

:popcorn2:
Dan

As everyone knows, a true race car is built to conform to a pre-existing set of rules for the class in which in which it will be competing. As a result these rules are typically very specific in nature to deal with specific issues that have come up previously.

The problem here is that we are discussing a set of rules which need to cover an entire segment of cars built to what ever level using what ever parts the individual owners chose. The result is that pro-touring cars have no commonality of parts or form. From that stand point any competition rules must of necessity be general in nature. This is why, IMO, the SCCA CAM class makes so much sense.

I give SCCA a great deal of credit for recognizing pro-touring and pro-mod as an emerging automotive segment which emphasizes well rounded car performance not just straight line speed and which did not fit well into any of their existing competition classes. It is apparent that SCCA is actively attempting to attract these pro-touring cars to attend their events with the introduction of the CAM class.

IMO, the obvious solution here is for the USCA to simply adopt the existing CAM class rules and run a CAM class next year in addition to the current classes. I see no logical reason to spend a lot of time and energy to reinvent the wheel that SCCA already has in place. It also seems to me that NASA, GG, etc. would be smart to adopt the CAM class rules as well which would go a long way to creating a uniform set of rules which would allow PT cars to compete in multiple events across multiple organizations.

This is going to be unpopular but I don't see this deal getting that big or gaining that much traction. It's time trials with no engagement for the fans. The crowds aren't big enough to support the secondary vendors pocket books.

Step back and take your personal interest to run or root for a competitor out of the equation.

I do think it has the capacity to prosper with Optima footing the bill. I'm just not sure they won't find a better place for the resources at some point.

Hate to be a pessimist, that's just the way I see it.

"Every party needs a pooper that's why we invited you, party pooper"
Well except you're right. I can only hope that the people that are being paid to promote this can get'er done next year.

Sponsors:

OPTIMA Batteries
BFGoodrich
Detroit Speed
Jet Hot Coating
K&N Filters
Lingenfelter
Red Line Oil
Ride Tech
Wilwood
Holley
Intercomp
Snap-On
Racing Junk
Showtime Motorsports

Which one is dependant on Pro-Touring? Yeah... none of them.

I for one hope that we never find ourselves competing to be the "Ultimate CAM or CAM Equivalent Street Car"

As Greg said with support (fan support included if this year is any indication) the OUSCI event is not going anywhere for a while.

Never said anything about dependent on PT. Quite a few have a specific line of parts geared toward what most on this site are doing though. James, just because another class exists doesn't mean you'd be pigeon holed, stay in the GT class and continue having fun!

:cheers:

The problem I see with that is...the same thing happened at the SCCA CAM Pro-Solo invitational. Some race cars on street tires showed up and dominated all 3 classes giving the larger numbers of real PT street cars a sour taste in their mouth.

The SCCA has realized this and that is why they went to OUSCI this year and are working with OUSCI and GGs to find a solution to this that will hopefully give all of the above cars a fun place to compete on level playing fields.

Maybe "sour taste" is a bit of a stretch, we all still had a blast. Probably not unlike how the bottom half of the OUSCI crowd felt. A long time veteran of the SCCA asked me though during the Pro-Solo if "this is what I envisioned the CAM class becoming" while watching the race cars on street tires...and I replied "No". But with just one or two simple rules, the race cars can be split from the street cars by class and we all still get to go out and have fun and put on a show for those watching.

I think your forgetting that this is on TV. The vendors are looking for exposure through that and will get it.

Just like off road racing, the best thing that ever happened to that line of racing is TV exposure so guys can get multi million dollar sponsorship deals. Gilla Monsters and the citizens of Mexico could care less about the whose name is on the side of the truck as it goes by at 100 plus mph.

Alright, how about this:

3 classes of cars for USCA, one determines the Ultimate Street Car Champion, the other two let the under series cars and drivers compete against cars like their own for their own trophy and recognition.

..................

Street Car Unlimited = Current OUSCI rules, winner determines the Ultimate Street Car Champion

Classic American Muscle = American made, factory steel body, 1989 and older, 200 TW tires with 275 or smaller front tires, stock appearing or fully finished interior, minimum weight 3000 pounds

Classic American Muscle Extreme = American made, factory steel body, 1989 and older, 200 TW tires any size, minimum weight 2800 pounds.

..................

These classes could be used at all of the USCA qualifying events and the Invitational, replacing the GTK2, GTK3, and AWD classes.

The Classic American Muscle and Classic American Muscle Extreme ruleset could also be used in the SCCA for their CAM classes. The cars in Street Car Unlimited generally already have appropriate competitive classes to run in with the SCCA.

The Classic American Muscle and Classic American Muscle Extreme could also be used in the Good Guys but change the model year to 1973. They could also do their PRO and truck classes, or whatever else they do (I'm not that familiar with the Good Guys ruleset).

..................

How the OUSCI distributes their points during the events can remain pretty much the same or be tweaked upon a bit. The only change I'd like to see is maybe a the number of total points available be as much or more than the number of entrants in any class so there aren't a bunch of cars with 1 point per event.

..................

The above class structure would put all of the late model Corvettes Camaros and Mustangs in the same class with the fast imports at the OUSCI. It would also let the PT cars run in one of two classes depending on their level of prep. Clean simple easy...yet fair and level playing field for all three groups.

I think you have some on that list that are dependant on pro-touring and majority of there revenue is vintage cars pre 1989.

I can't believe you listed DSE. I'm guessing 95% of there business is pro-touring. They only have late model Camaro stuff. 5 pages out of 125, of their catalog.

Ride tech they have systems and components that work on everything that has wheels on it. I bet most of their sales is in the pro-touring and vintage car market.