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

[chetly]

Originally Posted by SSLance

Those late model cars came to CAM because it was easy picking considering the classes they were running in before. I had to race my car in Street Modified the first year I ran, against Evos on Slicks. See the difference?

That's the facts of life with autocross, people are going to always want to go where it's going to be easier to win. There are people all over the US that are changing their cars yearly based on what cars are in what class. It happens.

[indydave]

Originally Posted by chetly

That's the facts of life with autocross, people are going to always want to go where it's going to be easier to win. There are people all over the US that are changing their cars yearly based on what cars are in what class. It happens.

That's not entirely true. In our Region, the influx of late model cars in CAM was due to the open nature of the rules and the ability to be competitive. The classes where a late model Mustang or Camaro falls on street tires in the normal SCCA structure puts them up against all wheel drive cars like the Evo and STi. And that's given that the mods on the muscle car doesn't push them beyond that and into race tire classes. To a man (or woman) competitor I've talked to with late model cars in CAM are there because they like not having to worry about rules.

[indydave]

Originally Posted by SSLance

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**

Hence why the classes aren't being split by an arbitrary model year, rather platform generations. Example: To say to someone with a 1990 Camaro that their car isn't legal for the class when it's the same car as an 1989 is silly. You can say "Well, we can make an exception". Why? Instead just say Camaros 1 through 3 are in this class, 4th and 5th generation Camaros are in that class. Or however the split is decided.

Also to start splitting by amount of modifications is counter to what CAM is. It is a hot rodders' class. Hot rodding is about modifying one's car for better performance and style. If one chooses to only go so far with a build, that's up to them. The whole idea of all of this regardless of whether it's SCCA, Optima, GG, whoever, is to give a place for hot rodders some way to show off their driving and building skills.

CAM doesn't need to be a National Championship class. As I said before, the majority of respondents when asked about "National" status said it wasn't important. Also, competitors wanting step beyond local competition has several avenues to follow now. They can run Optima, GG, or whoever else that offers a larger stage to perform on. Or with some changes, a competitor can enter SCCA's "national" stage in one of the many classes that already exist. Is SCCA planning some special CAM focused events? You bet. But they are being planned as "experience" events. The focus will be more on the experience than the intense competition focus that SCCA National events have. The focus will be on SCCA showing entrants a good time, something people will want to do again because it was a blast to be there.

[SSLance]

This thread was started because the late models and imports dominated the PT cars at the OUSCI. Some thought there might need to be some sort of rule change made to help everyone still be able to participate without being dominated unfairly.

The exact same discussion was being held by those that participated in the CAM Pro Solo prior to OUSCI and I knew that the SCCA guys were watching the OUSCI to see how it went.

I felt it was the perfect opportunity to make something good...better. Thats all. I'll still play in both arenas regardless, and I'll still have a blast.

[Showtimedriver]

"What would a USCA Pro touring class look like" hmmmm. The USCA conducted 10 events this year and Pro Touring cars won 5 of them (Over 3K). The Over 3K class had the lion share of entries at each race this year so maybe the USCA needs to look at the three classes they currently have first. Then decide from there. Having classes throughout the season is fine for trying to qualify for the OUSCI event, but in the end it all comes down to one big race with no classes at all during the grand finale. So why have any classes at all? I think the reason we are having this conversation is because of the caliber of cars that raced last weekend. Some Pro Touring and some super mosquito EVO's (who did a great job by the way), some 5th Gens, some Porsches, some GTR's! So why have a special class for Pro Touring? They won it last year, they didn't this year.

That is one way to look at it.

The other way is to make sure we keep these great cars coming back to race and make them relevant in every race the USCA conducts and the OUSCI. Mark Stielow said it perfectly. He could race a 5th Gen Camaro, spend half the money that it takes to build a killer 1st Gen Camaro and be successful with it. But that's not what he wants to do or what he is about. Hellfire is a superb example of what a 1969 Camaro would look like if it was built today....only better! That car was by far and away the fastest car on the strait away on the Las Vegas road course at the OUSCI, nobody could touch him. So to preserve this legacy that we call Pro Touring might be is we need to have a separate class for them, yet still compete overall. They are not over the hill yet! It would keep them competing through out the season and at the OUSCI.

[camcojb]

Originally Posted by Showtimedriver

"What would a USCA Pro touring class look like" hmmmm. The USCA conducted 10 events this year and Pro Touring cars won 5 of them (Over 3K). The Over 3K class had the lion share of entries at each race this year so maybe the USCA needs to look at the three classes they currently have first. Then decide from there. Having classes throughout the season is fine for trying to qualify for the OUSCI event, but in the end it all comes down to one big race with no classes at all during the grand finale. So why have any classes at all? I think the reason we are having this conversation is because of the caliber of cars that raced last weekend. Some Pro Touring and some super mosquito EVO's (who did a great job by the way), some 5th Gens, some Porsches, some GTR's! So why have a special class for Pro Touring? They won it last year, they didn't this year.

That is one way to look at it.

The other way is to make sure we keep these great cars coming back to race and make them relevant in every race the USCA conducts and the OUSCI. Mark Stielow said it perfectly. He could race a 5th Gen Camaro, spend half the money that it takes to build a killer 1st Gen Camaro and be successful with it. But that's not what he wants to do or what he is about. Hellfire is a superb example of what a 1969 Camaro would look like if it was built today....only better! That car was by far and away the fastest car on the strait away on the Las Vegas road course at the OUSCI, nobody could touch him. So to preserve this legacy that we call Pro Touring might be is we need to have a separate class for them, yet still compete overall. They are not over the hill yet! It would keep them competing through out the season and at the OUSCI.

Congrats Ken on winning the points championship for 3000# and over, and thanks for taking the time to post. My thought is if there's isn't some sort of protouring or older car class the big hitters will either build late model purpose built cars to be competitive, or drop out completely. There will always be some protouring guys to compete, many who do it for fun or are just excited to be there. But there's also the competitive guys who won't spend the time and money if there's no chance of winning. Those are the guys we don't want to lose.

[James OLC]

I'll post more on this idea later (I'm getting on a plane and will have some time) but what if, rather than asking USCA (et al) to create a class for "us" - an idea which I strongly disagree with - if there really is a demand why not create our "own class" that can run within the USCA for an independent title?

[SSLance]

Well... At least the SCCA gave us a decent PAX for 2015.

http://home.comcast.net/~paxrtp/rtp2015.html

[Msracing89]

Originally Posted by Flash68

Well done Preston.

Let's remember this is also a television show, SEMA, and sponsor driven. I have always been a huge fan of what Jimi is/was doing with this series.....but let's be honest here, it goes away without the unique twist that PT/ G-machines bring to fold.

Hate to be harsh, but who is tuning in to see the 5th gen or mid 2000's Vette run around by itself? Some yes, but that is not, I believe, what the vision of this series was moving forward. USCA can still cater to the later model cars, but realize the focus and class rules should be tailored to cars that will keep this series alive. I think we all know which cars those are.

[dunnjun]

I think Sik68 had the right idea. Two classes, "early models" and "late models". That way if I want to chase Mark or Kyle around for the Early model win I can drive Blu, or if I want to chase Danny or Ken around for the Late model win, I can drive the C5. And if I really want to go for the overall, I can build a Ken Block AWD, and try to keep up with the RS Motors gang. Seriously the AWD guys are going to be tough to beat!