What would a USCA pro-touring class look like??

[SSLance]

Originally Posted by TheJDMan

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.

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.

[TheJDMan]

Originally Posted by SSLance

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.

Lance,
So you're saying that with one or two minor changes the CAM class should work as intended, yes?

[SSLance]

Yes, I think so... Here are the results from the SCCA Nationals last September...Combined times from both East and West course

CAM-T
Mike Dusold 1967 Camaro 129.6977
Robby Unser 1964 Nova 132.058
Stephen Yeoh 1969 Camaro 132.245
Alan Schoonmaker 1969 Camaro 133.657
Jason Smith 1964 Nova 138.985

CAM-S
Scott Fraser 1966 Cobra 126.342
Bruce Cambern 1966 Cobra 132.812

CAM-C
Keith Lamming 2011 Camaro 132.906
Mike Trenkle 1985 Mustang 133.218
Lance Hamilton 1985 Monte Carlo 135.534
Chris Brake 2005 Ford Mustang 137.434
Kelley Jaeger 1985 Mustang 139.905
Stephanie Stribling 2005 Mustang 140.011
Valerie Pichette 1988 Pontiac GTA 142.701



Where they would have finished under my scenario of CAM and CAM Extreme


CAM
Robby Unser 1964 Nova 132.058
Stephen Yeoh 1969 Camaro 132.245
Alan Schoonmaker 1969 Camaro 133.657
Lance Hamilton 1985 Monte Carlo 135.534
Jason Smith 1964 Nova 138.985
Valerie Pichette 1988 Pontiac GTA 142.701

All very similarly prepped and looking cars

CAM Extreme
Mike Dusold 1967 Camaro 129.6977
Mike Trenkle 1985 Mustang 133.218 (315s all the way around)
Kelley Jaeger 1985 Mustang 139.905


These cars would have fit into other already existing SCCA classes that they are competitive in

Scott Fraser 1966 Cobra 126.342 XP I think
Bruce Cambern 1966 Cobra 132.812 XP I think
Keith Lamming 2011 Camaro 132.906 FS
Chris Brake 2005 Ford Mustang 137.434 ESP I believe
Stephanie Stribling 2005 Mustang 140.011 ESP I believe


I think we all ran better times on Tuesday on the West course, here are our best times just from that day:

CAM
Stephen Yeoh 1969 Camaro 64.181
Robby Unser 1964 Nova 64.607
Alan Schoonmaker 1969 Camaro 64.936
Lance Hamilton 1985 Monte Carlo 64.958
Jason Smith 1964 Nova 67.927
Valerie Pichette 1988 Pontiac GTA 68.811


CAM Extreme
Mike Dusold 1967 Camaro 62.764
Mike Trenkle 1985 Mustang 64.042
Kelley Jaeger 1985 Mustang 67.802

To me, those two groupings just look like more evenly matched cars and times. Dusold's 1967 Camaro is Extreme I think we'd all agree and Trenkle's Mustang is similar looking. All of the cars in CAM were stock sheetmetal, small tired, but all with very modified drivetrains and the top 4 were within 3/4s of a second of each other.

These below just didn't fit in in my opinion, all for different reasons.

Scott Fraser 1966 Cobra 61.335
Bruce Cambern 1966 Cobra 63.463
Keith Lamming 2011 Camaro 64.672
Chris Brake 2005 Ford Mustang 66.801
Stephanie Stribling 2005 Mustang 67.913

If I could find the results for the Pro Solo Invitational qualifying times, the results would be similar only the Extreme would be more represented by the 3 Lesinger vehicles (with respective times) and CAM would be more represented by several stock sheet metal'd small tire muscle cars. There were also more late model Mustangs and 5th gen Camaros that were constantly putting down better times than the CAM cars.

[chetly]

Originally Posted by SSLance

Yes, I think so... Here are the results from the SCCA Nationals last September...Combined times from both East and West course

CAM-T
Mike Dusold 1967 Camaro 129.6977
Robby Unser 1964 Nova 132.058
Stephen Yeoh 1969 Camaro 132.245
Alan Schoonmaker 1969 Camaro 133.657
Jason Smith 1964 Nova 138.985

CAM-S
Scott Fraser 1966 Cobra 126.342
Bruce Cambern 1966 Cobra 132.812

CAM-C
Keith Lamming 2011 Camaro 132.906
Mike Trenkle 1985 Mustang 133.218
Lance Hamilton 1985 Monte Carlo 135.534
Chris Brake 2005 Ford Mustang 137.434
Kelley Jaeger 1985 Mustang 139.905
Stephanie Stribling 2005 Mustang 140.011
Valerie Pichette 1988 Pontiac GTA 142.701



Where they would have finished under my scenario of CAM and CAM Extreme


CAM
Robby Unser 1964 Nova 132.058
Stephen Yeoh 1969 Camaro 132.245
Alan Schoonmaker 1969 Camaro 133.657
Lance Hamilton 1985 Monte Carlo 135.534
Jason Smith 1964 Nova 138.985
Valerie Pichette 1988 Pontiac GTA 142.701

All very similarly prepped and looking cars

CAM Extreme
Mike Dusold 1967 Camaro 129.6977
Mike Trenkle 1985 Mustang 133.218 (315s all the way around)
Kelley Jaeger 1985 Mustang 139.905


These cars would have fit into other already existing SCCA classes that they are competitive in

Scott Fraser 1966 Cobra 126.342 XP I think
Bruce Cambern 1966 Cobra 132.812 XP I think
Keith Lamming 2011 Camaro 132.906 FS
Chris Brake 2005 Ford Mustang 137.434 ESP I believe
Stephanie Stribling 2005 Mustang 140.011 ESP I believe


I think we all ran better times on Tuesday on the West course, here are our best times just from that day:

CAM
Stephen Yeoh 1969 Camaro 64.181
Robby Unser 1964 Nova 64.607
Alan Schoonmaker 1969 Camaro 64.936
Lance Hamilton 1985 Monte Carlo 64.958
Jason Smith 1964 Nova 67.927
Valerie Pichette 1988 Pontiac GTA 68.811


CAM Extreme
Mike Dusold 1967 Camaro 62.764
Mike Trenkle 1985 Mustang 64.042
Kelley Jaeger 1985 Mustang 67.802

To me, those two groupings just look like more evenly matched cars and times. Dusold's 1967 Camaro is Extreme I think we'd all agree and Trenkle's Mustang is similar looking. All of the cars in CAM were stock sheetmetal, small tired, but all with very modified drivetrains and the top 4 were within 3/4s of a second of each other.

These below just didn't fit in in my opinion, all for different reasons.

Scott Fraser 1966 Cobra 61.335
Bruce Cambern 1966 Cobra 63.463
Keith Lamming 2011 Camaro 64.672
Chris Brake 2005 Ford Mustang 66.801
Stephanie Stribling 2005 Mustang 67.913

If I could find the results for the Pro Solo Invitational qualifying times, the results would be similar only the Extreme would be more represented by the 3 Lesinger vehicles (with respective times) and CAM would be more represented by several stock sheet metal'd small tire muscle cars. There were also more late model Mustangs and 5th gen Camaros that were constantly putting down better times than the CAM cars.

What you may or may not realize is the amount of modifications to the cars your kicking out of CAM may put them in classes that require r-comp tires, not street tires. Maybe those people don't want to run race rubber, or can't run nationals on certain days.
I don't see where your classes are anymore fair than the current classes. The time difference between 1st and worse is still in the 9-10 second range. You in fact drop one position. Until SCCA starts seeing a heavier participation of the CAM classes then they will more than likely stand with the current.

[preston]

I think what made and makes Optima special is that they pick beautiful and interesting cars. Its starting to morph more towards the "ultimate street car" side of things but what originally made it so unique and interesting ? It was because they were picking normal show cars and extreme builds and it gave us all a chance to see how they would really perform. A few late models as a benchmark was fine, but it seems like we are all deep into discussing it as a truly competitive race event now. I feel like there are a hundred places to go and reace for real, maybe they don't all accomodate old iron as well as you would like but if I was Optima I would stick more to the invitiational format, and look for interesting show cars, old cars, and unique builds with the idea that we are just throwing them together to see how they perform, less than "we are having a psuedo-race to sort of crown a time trail type champion of street legal cars".

That's my take on it - less about racing and more about seeing cool cars perform, because there are dozens of other time trial and race venues, Optima was unique because of the types of cars they invite.

[JKnight]

You're right on Preston, every word of it. What made the optima event special and interesting is not what makes for a "fair" race.

[Vegas69]

Really strong points Preston. You can race your way in, use humility, be invited to participate. The balance of cars was excellent this year. Vintage, makes, colors, noises, etc.. It seems difficult to sanction. That was where my comments came from, it's a great event that is a luxury for the competitors and will continue as long as sponsors see value.

Rodger makes a valid point, it's made for TV. I just see it as a show that will lose it's luster like every other reality show. Judging by the crowd and rules, the racing won't sustain it.

[indydave]

I mostly lurk here but have some inside perspective on some of this, in particular with SCCA's CAM class.

My "insider" status comes from I wrote the rules for the Indianapolis Region that SCCA used to create CAM and I'm personal friends with Raleigh and Velma Boreen, the couple from SCCA who have been representing SCCA @ Optima last week and GG this week. Raleigh is employed by SCCA and one of his charges is plotting the direction of CAM.

Comparing CAM to the Optima series is an apples to oranges deal. Optima is a dedicated series while CAM is a class (soon to be a category, more on that further down) within SCCA's Solo program. Further, CAM is what's considered within Solo as a "Regional" class. That means the class is not eligible for National Championship status nor is it an included class at SCCA National Tour events (Champ Tour, Match Tour, Pro-Solo). It can and has been added as a supplemental class at many Tour eventsand as most are aware, it was added as an Invitational supplemental class during the Pro-Solo Finale as well as a supplemental class(es) at the Solo Nationals. The winners of those events are not recognized by SCCA as National Champions, just winners of those classes at that event.

The purpose of CAM is not to compete with USCA, GG, or anyone else but rather to give people with PT type cars, street machines, and hot rods a class at local SCCA Solo events. Since these cars are not built to a ruleset, under the standard SCCA Solo rules structure, Regions would class cars that showed up where they think they should go. Don't need to go into all that as most of you know what those problems were. People would show up with a street machine, run an event or two, then be gone. CAM hopes to solve that problem and by and by large it has. Many Regions have reported that participation in CAM has been very good and that's what SCCA was after. Get people to come to (Regional) events and keep coming. It's working.

When I wrote the rules for the Indy Region I took GG's rules, copied them, then changed things to make sure they fit SCCA safety rules. I used their rules because they were the most open and strictly autocross focused. When SCCA National got involved they spent an entire year talking to organizations and competitors as to what they wanted to see. CAM was what came from those conversations. SCCA published the rules and asked Regions to play with the class to see what works best. Comparing CAM to what Optima / USCA does will never be 100% the same because of the differences in scope of either bodies events.

Now that I've bored all of you to tears with my long winded dissertation, here's what happening with CAM as I know it and why some of the things being suggested here probably won't see the light of day in CAM. I've have ben given the suggested ruleset for CAM 2015 and here's the highlights:

-CAM will become a category with 3 classes with the classes similar to the rules used for the CAM Invitational and Supplemental CAM classes at the Solo Nationals. Those classes as proposed are:
CAM/T- open to older American made front engine, rear wheel drive cars originally built with minimum of four seats with cutoffs being not being an arbitrary model year but rather by model generations.
CAM/C- open to late model American made front engine, rear wheel drive cars originally built with a minimum of four seats.
CAM/S- open to American made front engine, rear wheel drive cars originally built with 2 seats as well as kit cars and vintage hot rods.

-an exclusions list that outlaw C-5 and newer Corvettes, Vipers, and boutique manufacturer super cars as well as subcompact cars from the seventies such as the Vega, Pinto, et-al.

-the rest of the rules proposed would carry over from 2014. There are some things that are still very fluid such as proposed minimum weights and what subcompact cars are to be included on the exclusions list.

-that CAM remain a Regional only class for the foreseeable future. National status for the class for the class was by and large not a concern for most competitors when asked.

-also proposed are a minimum of 2 special events just for CAM class car in addition to the CAM Invitational. One event would be out west, the other in the Midwest. These events would be qualifiers to earn invitations for the CAM Invitational. These events would be either be run as a Pro Solo or a Match Tour pending site locations.

-What didn't make the cut was limiting tire section width and chassis limits. At the Regional level, this simply has not been an issue and surveying class competitors at the Region level it just wasn't a concern for the majority. The chances of a Josh Leisenger showing up with the Crusher II Corvette at a local SCCA Solo are remote at best. At the "special" events proposed, both formats use a "dial" to help even the competition between the classes. Those dials are based on the fast qualifier's time for each class and is someone goes faster than the dial during competition the faster time becomes that individual competitor's personal dial.

Now I will agree with those who say that organizers like Optima should look into creating a class for vintage cars. I've followed the series from the beginning and yes, traditional PT cars are beginning to fall behind.

Last thing, SCCA wants to set and announce the 2015 CAM rules by the PRI show, hopefully sooner. Stay tuned.....

[GrabberGT]

Originally Posted by indydave

.....

Please tell me Maverick will not be considered a sub compact.

[SSLance]

Originally Posted by indydave

I've have ben given the suggested ruleset for CAM 2015 and here's the highlights:

-CAM will become a category with 3 classes with the classes similar to the rules used for the CAM Invitational and Supplemental CAM classes at the Solo Nationals. Those classes as proposed are:
CAM/T- open to older American made front engine, rear wheel drive cars originally built with minimum of four seats with cutoffs being not being an arbitrary model year but rather by model generations.
CAM/C- open to late model American made front engine, rear wheel drive cars originally built with a minimum of four seats.
CAM/S- open to American made front engine, rear wheel drive cars originally built with 2 seats as well as kit cars and vintage hot rods.

-an exclusions list that outlaw C-5 and newer Corvettes, Vipers, and boutique manufacturer super cars as well as subcompact cars from the seventies such as the Vega, Pinto, et-al.

-the rest of the rules proposed would carry over from 2014. There are some things that are still very fluid such as proposed minimum weights and what subcompact cars are to be included on the exclusions list.

-that CAM remain a Regional only class for the foreseeable future. National status for the class for the class was by and large not a concern for most competitors when asked.

-also proposed are a minimum of 2 special events just for CAM class car in addition to the CAM Invitational. One event would be out west, the other in the Midwest. These events would be qualifiers to earn invitations for the CAM Invitational. These events would be either be run as a Pro Solo or a Match Tour pending site locations.

-What didn't make the cut was limiting tire section width and chassis limits. At the Regional level, this simply has not been an issue and surveying class competitors at the Region level it just wasn't a concern for the majority. The chances of a Josh Leisenger showing up with the Crusher II Corvette at a local SCCA Solo are remote at best. At the "special" events proposed, both formats use a "dial" to help even the competition between the classes. Those dials are based on the fast qualifier's time for each class and is someone goes faster than the dial during competition the faster time becomes that individual competitor's personal dial.

Well... That is disappointing.

On a local Regional level I'm fine with it, but not having a legitimate National Class that would split the field up in a competitive nature is a mistake.

Any 3000 pound car made before 1989 is not going to be fast without modifications, many modifications. Any 3000 pound car made before 1989 can be made to be just as fast as any other 3000 pound car with unlimited modifications. Why bother splitting them up by arbitrary model year?

Leave it to the SCCA... **rolleyes**