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

[chetly]

Originally Posted by Matt.A

I like that idea. My second thought is that it would make it impossible to have a season long points standing if there are 60 people at one event and 40 at the next.

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

[James OLC]

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.

[57hemicuda]

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.

[65_LS1_T56]

Originally Posted by 57hemicuda

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 and 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!

[71RS/SS396]

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.

[71RS/SS396]

Originally Posted by 57hemicuda

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 and 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.

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

[57hemicuda]

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

[LS7 Z/28]

Originally Posted by 71RS/SS396

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.

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.

[71RS/SS396]

Originally Posted by 57hemicuda

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

TMI Not really interested in your erectile situation!

[dontlifttoshift]

Originally Posted by 71RS/SS396

TMI Not really interested in your erectile situation!

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

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