Quote:
Originally Posted by Flash68
Not sure how there is Camaro talk in your Mustang thread (or why Rob would allow such a travesty) but I digress....
Matt, for the ball not bouncing your way the past 2 weeks you did really dang good man. You drove the car there sans trailer, had the restraint and maturity to not show the Farfegnugen car with the trigger happy Blow Off Valve who's boss on the road rally, and did half of your own navigating on said road rally (my bad!).
Seriously, you represented the real pro touring cars well and without even a fraction of the design points you should have gotten.
I mean.... 1 friggin point in the Design portion?! Yeah I'll say it... what a rip off that was. They must have gotten your car and the near stock looking 5th gen mixed up.
I'll cap it off with this... How does a recent SEMA GM Design Award Winner get 1 point?
Thanks for letting me navigate and hitch a ride. Was great being part of that cruise with ya. 
|
Dude, I had a blast on the road rally, probably just as much fun as driving in the actually track segments of the event. Never expected that, and I'm not just saying that because I dropped the ball on two of the three track components. Perhaps trying to get from Freemont street to the 515 freeway added an element of danger that made it exciting. That and getting revved at by a Subie wagon.

Next time (Maybe Laguna Seca in March??) I think we should try and squeeze Brett in next to Jeffrey.
Okay, now... since this is my little build thread, I'm going to take it off topic a little bit (maybe I can tie it back to building the Camaro) and rant a little bit. I'm happy to have been given the opportunity to compete in OUSCI and I'm happy to have finished the event. I'm a little let down by my own driving, but hey, that is why we race and don't just look at parts and crunch numbers to find a winner.
The one thing I want to rant about though is the the design component. I might lose a few people here, but try and bear with me guys. I'm not writing this because I just want to bitch and complain, but rather because I really enjoyed the event, the level of organization was great. Both Jimi and the autocross team kept the event running fast, and most of all showed responsibility in making judgement calls to keep things safe. The Design portion was the only part of the event that I felt didn't live up to everything else. I highly doubt my opinion on the subject matters, or will be read by anyone involved, but here it goes anyway.
Design is subjective. It is an art form in its own right, and every viewer has a different opinion. Just as there are different schools and philosophies in art, from impressionists to cubists, and some of the post modernists whose works I have no idea how to classify, so there are similar subcultures in the car customizing aftermarket from the stanced and hellaflush movements that Rob greatly adores, to the more subtle and refined creations that builders like Trapanier and Strope have been turning, or the Ring Brothers, whose work has its own identity. My point is, there are many sub-genres of art and design in general. As individuals we are naturally going to be opinionated about what we see. Some of the most fun we have at SEMA is probably being able to lean over to one of our buddies at a show while standing next to a mid to high six figure build and saying, "man, why did they do that?" Still, most of us are mature enough to respect builds and builders for their craftsmanship and execution of concept, which is really no different than how art is critiqued. Where I take issue with the design component of the event is how haphazardly it was judged. The judges said they were looking for what differentiated each individual car from the way it left the factory. The design portion was also put in place to help well built street cars compete with their more race oriented rivals. I would be okay with that if the design score cards were indicative of the alleged scoring criteria. Tell me though, how does a mid engined Mustang with impeccable fit and finish not win the design portion under the aforementioned basis for critique? Eckler's can probably list on one hand the number of factory pieces retained on that car. On the other hand how does an Audi R8 with aftermarket wheels, underglow neon lights and a big wing take home third place in the segment? If Pfaff and Lingenfelter were judging based on how well they felt the Audi lived up to its concept, that would be different, but that wasn't the story this past weekend.
When they judged my car, they made it clear that they were looking for what made it stand out compared to a factory car. I have original doors, decklid and roof. Everything was built with attention to combining form and function with as little compromise as possible to either, while still remaining understated. I wanted the classic shape of a Camaro with a bit of the vibe of a contemporary grand touring car. I got one point. Steilow's car, which I feel follows a similar concept received 15 design points. Are our two cars really that different? Lastly, let's talk about the Lingenfelter Camaro. It has a vinyl wrap, aftermarket wheels, a different grille, and maybe some body kit pieces. Was it really deserving of more points than my car or even the CTS-V challenge car, if we're going to make a slightly more apples to apples comparison. I'll let you guys decide...
I wouldn't have bothered to write this all if I thought I was the only one who felt this way, but when Tim McGilton voiced similar concerns about the design portion in another thread, I figured there are probably a lot of us who feel this way, and maybe our opinions should be put out in the open. In the grand scheme these events are for people to enjoy, so maybe we shouldn't worry about who does or doesn't get design points, but at the same time, if these events are for fun, why are they becoming competitive enough that that two of the three podium spots were decided by style points awarded by judges who designed or owned the two cars in question?