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

[LS7 Z/28]

Originally Posted by Sieg

One interesting qualifier for street car designation would be how would the average neighbor feel about hearing the car start and warm up at 6-7 am? Based on my observation less than 30% of the cars in the OUSCI pits would make for happy neighbors.

You like to hear that badass rumble just as much as the next guy does, don't give me that crap about yuppie neighbors being pissed off!


They may be "Street Cars" but that doesn't mean they have to have the exhaust note of a Prius.

[Flash68]

Originally Posted by Valve Lash

You like to hear that badass rumble just as much as the next guy does, don't give me that crap about yuppie neighbors being pissed off!


They may be "Street Cars" but that doesn't mean they have to have the exhaust note of a Prius.

You got that right...

"If it's too loud, you're too old!"

[James OLC]

Originally Posted by Che70velle

Mark says it best. He doesn't want to kill himself to build a cool old car, and then be forced to go run against late model vehicles with numerous advantages, out of the box.

This is what will eventually thin the competitors.
This is what will eventually thin the spectators.
Sponsors won't stick around...
This is why classes AND rules are necessary. We have a great thing going here, it simply needs tweaking.

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

[Blake Foster]

Just reading James last post.
What do you suspect the posts look like on the C5,6,7 forums and the import forums.

Quote" God all we need to do is get rid of those slow old cars and have a really cool event of our own" .............. lol

[96z28ss]

Originally Posted by James OLC

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


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.

This weekend sure. However since 2008 the field was mostly pro-touring cars. That's why we kind of all feel we should still be a part of it.

[Vegas69]

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

Couldn't agree more. The fact is that there are a handful of names from this segment that are competitive that are recurring. It needs fresh blood to attract new attention to the series if it's to make it.

Optima is doing it for one reason, exposure.

[Cris@JCG]

I can see vendors that have sponsored the event from the beginning having a influence on changes required to make this more fair for the future especially the vendors that sell parts for Pro-Touring cars.. but as I was told by one of the highly respected board members here.. We have a choice! to participate or not to participate..

The rules will also have some impact on participation.. The biggest rumor going on @ SEMA this year for OUSCI was aero being banned for 2015 because this one guy wrote a letter to USCA complaining that was un-fair(BTW the guy was in the top 10).. So if writing a letter to USCA can change a rule.. Then if most of the board members here wrote a letter to USCA to have a class for Pro-Touring cars then we might have a chance of it being implemented.. Just saying!

Class 1 champion pre- 89
Class2 champion 89 to present
Class3 champion sports car
Just examples..

Overall grand champion from the field of 100 cars!

At least this gives more participates a chance to win something.. USCA & OUSCI has to acknowledge that @ least 50 to 60% of the field is there to try to win.. anybody that participated add up there receipts yet on what it cost to spend a week in Vegas plus car prep?

The bottom line it was a honor to be invited to the event! I had a blast & have some great memories.. will I try next to attend the events to win my way thru points.. don't know yet.. right now looking on how to build an all wheel drive C3 Corvette!

[chetly]

Originally Posted by SSLance

Me too Ron... Me too...


Looking at the final results from last weekend, it appears like positions 40 or so through 100 were basically dictated by the judging in the Design and Engineering portion of the event. That is disappointing to many I'm certain.

I know a lot of those drivers and I'm certain had I been there I would have been one in that section as well. I know all of them are chomping at the bit to see the actual spreadsheet with the details of their results so they can see "who did I beat in the autocross", and "where did I end up in the Speed Stop or Hot Lap" sections overall. I know most of these drivers did not have a chance at winning overall but I also know they are damn interested in how they did stack up to those around them in the actual events that were measured by a stop watch (even if it wasn't for the true overall win).

This is why I asked about your double points for street car functional features idea. Not specifically for each point calculation, but how this portion of the event can or should be used when determining the final outcome. I know the reason why this portion is used for one fifth of the points overall, but IMHO if this portion alone is going to determine spots 40-100...it needs to be a bit less subjective and a bit more detailed and laid out in advance.



Again, I would have loved to been there regardless and I'm making every effort I can to be there next year, regardless... I think it is still the best thing going for this segment of the automotive world...I'm just hoping with input from all of us we can make it even better for everyone.

.


Agreed, I would have liked to seen however many cars were there giving points. I.E. Danny got 1st on the hot lap so he gets 106, or whatever the car count is. Last place finisher gets one. You'd at least be able to tell who you faster/slower than...

[Matt@BOS]

Originally Posted by chetly

.


Agreed, I would have liked to seen however many cars were there giving points. I.E. Danny got 1st on the hot lap so he gets 106, or whatever the car count is. Last place finisher gets one. You'd at least be able to tell who you faster/slower than...

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

[Neil B]

This happens to every race series once it gains attention and actually means something to win. A race car and driver are simply tools. He who brings the best tool for the job wins. Rules define the best tool. Simple as that. Why build a 6-figure pro-touring car and then get schooled by a gutted C5? Just sayin'.