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

[Blake Foster]

Originally Posted by 71RS/SS396

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.

We went out to Thunderhill in my Nova with Jay driving me in the pass seat. please excuse the language in the following sentence.

but as a passenger scared the SH!T out of me. and yea there is NO WAY you could have stayed in the seat like described above.

[Che70velle]

Originally Posted by James OLC

On an event or series basis I will politely disagree with this.

I believe what you were saying is:

This is what will eventually thin the Pro-Touring focused competitors.
This is what will eventually thin the Pro-Touring focused spectators.
Pro-Touring focused Sponsors won't stick around...

From what I saw last weekend "we" are a small part of this overall concept yet "we" think we have some right of ownership to the idea. The enthusiasm and support that some of the import teams had was simply amazing and frankly put us to shame. And again, from what I saw, the import folks (new and old, competitive and not) were every bit as (if not more) excited and proud to be there as anyone. And, to be honest, they were younger than most of us. Appreciate them or not "they" are the next generation.

Jody's question here was what would a PT class look like and I think that there are several great answers to that. BUT there seems to be an assumption that OUSCI (or SSCA or GG) needs to change to suit us or they are going to fail. Not the case. The only potential loser in any of these cases is ourselves. We need to show THEM that we can be a part of their events and we can make them more successful. Personally I think that they know that - the reception that Smitty, Poorvette, and I received when we pulled off the track showed me that we put on a show for the fans - but I wouldn't expect them to cater to us exclusively.

As I said to one member last week at SEMA - why should the USCA (or OUSCI) define "us"? It's just one of many opportunities that we have to enjoy our cars but it's existence doesn't somehow dictate what we can or can not do.

Just my 2 bits

James, this is exactly what I was saying. I don't really care about the import racers, spectators, or sponsors (gasp!), or even the late model guys sponsors, etc. What I do care about is fair racing, because I am a racer. Been involved in racing since the early 90's.
Do we not have some ownership in this deal? It's totally irrelevant, but I'm glad that the import crowd seemed excited to be there. They should be excited to be there, when they know that they are out gunning a bunch of old cars. So I'll say it again, I'm interested in fairness. I do appreciate the younger crowd, the next generation, as you called them. I hope they stick around, and possibly even catch on to what "we" are all shooting for, which is trying to up the performance levels of our old cars, and then instead of street racing, which is stupid, find a venue to compete against ONE ANOTHER, in fairness. As Mark said, and I'll say this again, I don't want build a cool old car, and then go run it against late model cars. Well I don't either. In fact, come springtime and I pull into some of these venues, I'll be downright upset, if I have to face off against an all wheel drive import. That's not what I'm building my car for. So why not have a class just for those of us with old cars? Let the late model guys race against themselves!
The performance parts that me and you are purchasing today, for our old cars, were bred and designed out of the desire to make our cars more competitive against each other, due to events and series like these. If the future of these organizations cater to the late model guys, and the "Pro Touring" community gets left behind, then "we" suffer. At the end of the day, it's all just a hobby for us on this side. Hopefully the promotors will listen to the little guys, and at least keep this hobby fair.
Jody, I don't know if there is a correct answer to your question...

My .02 pesos...

[glassman]

Originally Posted by ironworks

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.

Totally agree.
And from what Rodney was telling me, this is the number one rated show on MAVTV. Or at least one episode was. Its a small network now but.....who knows?

[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.....