+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3
Results 41 to 45 of 45
Like Tree6Likes

Thread: SCCA T1 about to die?

  1. #41
    Chest hair required Olitho's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    5,088
    Liked
    2165 times

    Default

    I just forwarded the link to this thread to some of the decision-makers at SCCA so they can see the market response.

    State your case now if you have a strong opinion one way or another.....


    Oli
    To the right of The Sheriff. Isn't everyone?

  2. #42
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    10,979
    Liked
    1477 times

    Default

    The negative reaction of the membership to the proposal to combine FE and FM was overwhelming, and SCCA backed off. There is someplace where you can write your comments about the proposed changes, but I don't have the link. Maybe Oli knows?
    The deposed former Sheriff of trackHQ . . .

    2006 Porsche 997 Carerra Coupe 6-MT - daily driver
    1992 Honda (Acura) NSX 5-MT - classic investment I couldn't resist and occasionally drive
    2004 Honda S2000 AP2 6-MT - track day car
    2006 Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution IX MR 6-MT - when I need a backseat, 4-doors, or a real trunk, and still want to haul ass . . .

  3. #43
    Senior Member robburgoon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    6,853
    Liked
    1429 times

    Default

    The manufacturers aren't delivering on supporting stock-appearing cars, so drop that "showroom stock roots" class philosophy bull****.

    Spec racing is the most successful type of class in the SCCA right now. Create Spec Corvette, give the C6s plates, get them to similar C5Z06 weight, or exclude the C6 completely. Spec them a harder tire and shocks. Let the mustangs have what's left of T1 and kill the T1 class when it fails in 2 years.

    NASA is rolling out spec 350Z, but it will fail since the 350Z is a turd. There is demand for a much faster spec miata class, and spec C5Z06 is it.

    c5z06 + spec non-adjustable shock that is a little under damped (sachs or bilstein) + 315 nt-01s ($250 each) + stock springs + t1 sways + gutted cockpit + prop valve + optionally disabled ABS= successful spec class.

  4. #44
    MJM
    MJM is offline
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    108
    Liked
    9 times

    Default

    Oli,

    Here is what is pissing me off. They made a proposal to consolidate classes in 2013 and asked for input. I sent input. They mention my letter on the July fast track but say

    "The class structure specifics, i.e., weight, restrictors, parts, etc. still need to be refined. This will be taking place in the coming months."

    Yet their bulletin says they have already decided to slow down T1 cars.

    So which is it? Are they listening to the club members or have they already pre-determined the fate of this strong class? From the above timeline it looks like they have already made their decision.

    I am for consolidation, but it should involve speeding cars up. Who buys a racecar to slow down? I will race elsewhere.

    Matt

  5. #45
    Spec Backhoe Champion redtopz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,229
    Liked
    981 times

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MJM View Post
    Oli,

    Here is what is pissing me off. They made a proposal to consolidate classes in 2013 and asked for input. I sent input. They mention my letter on the July fast track but say

    "The class structure specifics, i.e., weight, restrictors, parts, etc. still need to be refined. This will be taking place in the coming months."

    Yet their bulletin says they have already decided to slow down T1 cars.

    So which is it? Are they listening to the club members or have they already pre-determined the fate of this strong class? From the above timeline it looks like they have already made their decision.

    I am for consolidation, but it should involve speeding cars up. Who buys a racecar to slow down? I will race elsewhere.

    Matt
    +1. Thanks Oli for forwarding our concerns.

    I think T1 was moving in the right direction. I was happy with how the class was progressing over the past 12 months and our group is growing. We have spent a considerable amount of time and money setting up our cars to compete in this national class. Our lap times are also close and we have some great racing. Maybe some changes are necessary for the slower classes, but T1 needs to remain a fast class! A 10 year old corvette should not have to be slowed down to race T1. The new mustangs are already very fast and can easily match our lap times with the right setup. Vipers, bmw's, porsches, ferraris, etc. are all fast cars. Why should they have to slow down for T1? SCCA will be destroying the top touring class by watering it down. It's not sexy to race a heavy pig, restricted T1 car that turns slower laps than the guys in hpde in the same car! People in hpde and time trialing are your future racers. Do you think they are going to be attracted to racing in a class that will force them to go slower than they were in hpde? Hell no. People will go where the fast guys are racing where they can race their cars to their full potential. Another thing to consider is NASA has a stable rule set with the power to weight ratio. If you choose ST2, you know your car is set at 8.7 lbs/hp with no random changes year to year. SCCA needs to keep T1 the same and let it grow with a stable rule set.
    Last edited by redtopz; 06-12-2012 at 08:44 PM.
    99 C5 corvette SCCA GT2
    99 Supermiata "Super"

+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts