autox
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: (imrx7) Re: Car Classification Rules

To: Darren Loher <dploher@level3.net>
Subject: Re: (imrx7) Re: Car Classification Rules
From: Chris Shepard <maverick@purplemtn.com>
Date: Tue, 06 Jun 2000 12:59:25 -0600
Darren Loher wrote:
> 
> 
> I must admit, I wish there were a set of car classes
> that followed preparation rules that aligned with
> my budget over the years.  Really, there sorta are,
> as long as you're willing to start with a relatively
> new car.  
>
        A "newish" car is already misaligned with _my_ 
        budget.  That's why I went shopping in the
        local junkyards.  :)
>
> 
> So the real problem here is your stripped interior.  Since
> most autocross cars are also daily drivers, stripping the
> interior is considered a pretty big deal.  The benefit is
> the most important kind to get (other than driver skill
> which is by far the most important): Less weight.
> 
        I drive it on the streets all the time.  Carpeting
        has little to do with streetability, as far as I'm
        concerned.  It's got turn signals, headlights, wipers
        and such.  Colorado says it's street legal, so it
        at least "oughta" be CSP, huh?  I don't _really_
        care, since any CSP car will beat me as bad as any
        FP car, it just seems like the "gutting" rule should
        concern itself with "stockness" issues rather than
        "appearance", or C&C issues.  Maybe along with the
        other requirements that separate Stock from Street 
        Prepared...?  Like racing tires should, imho.  <grin> 

        Yeah, yeah, I know...Colo region has the SM class.
        Like I'm gonna run against a 427 Camaro and a 260Z
        with a Chevy 350.  Gittin' beat and bruised is one 
        thing, I'm used to that, but gittin' humiliated is 
        sumpin' else again.  8-D

        Besides, I'm actually planning (I can hear the
        laughter already!) on taking (read: driving) the 
        little buzz bomb to Topeka, and that means FP for sure.
>
> Being the Rocky Mountain Division Administrator for SpecRX7
> has given me lots of new perspective on auto racing rules.
> Cost control and competitiveness are the big pieces.  In
> autocrossing and SpecRX7, streetability is also an issue.
> 
        Someone told me that with just a roll bar I 
        could call it an ITA road racer and run autox CSP.  
        Any truth to that?  I tried to get an IT Specs book
        from club HQ, but they were out.  Don't like the
        upper weight of a roll bar, but my junker running in 
        FP is simply ludicrous.  ;)     

> -Darren
> 
> On Tue, Jun 06, 2000 at 11:58:49AM -0500, John Galligan wrote:
> > Now David, tell us how you really feel!  You forgot to mention that you
> > could beat most anyone in your class no matter what you drove.  Driving
> > ability is at least 80%.  You have proven that to me.
> > John
> >
> > David Hawkins wrote:
> > >
> > > >I realize some (few, based on what I read in this list) of
> > > >y'all are serious competitors at the national level, and the
> > > >issues of shift knob weight or whatever are of legitimate concern
> > > >to those who may have beaucoup bucks invested, but please don't
> > > >take offense if you overhear some of us real grassroots types
> > > >chuckling gently in the background.
> > > >
> > > >Three or four year$ from now my little rotary rowboat may
> > > >actually *BE* an FP race car, but even then I'll just be
> > > >out to have a blast, like _most_ everybody else in autox-ing.
> > > >"Spin or win, it's a grin".
> > >
> > > I may be the only one here who feels this way, but a lot of the
> > > enjoyment of autox for me is seeing what I can get out of the car
> > > while still following the rules.  I love the driving...don't think for
> > > a second that that isn't true, but it's a challenge to stay between
> > > the lines while changing anything on the car.  I LIKE that.  While
> > > I may not protest you for having a grey area, I WILL look down
> > > on you as a competitor if you don't follow the rules.  I look at a
> > > car, see an aftermarket shift knob (which can be a HUGE
> > > advantage on some cars....a poor man's short shift kit) and wonder
> > > what else has been subjected to the grey area.  After all, if you're
> > > going to wave a technical rule book violation in the open, what
> > > have you done that can't be seen?
> > >
> > > I run a 1986 Cressida in DM....I put a turbo on it, so it's definitely
> > > mod, and I want to run in the same class that my MR2 can run in
> > > (too small for EM).  The times aren't what you'd consider for DM
> > > at all....and I could probably get away with running in ESP or whatever
> > > SP class this beast falls in (and still lose)...but I don't, because I
> > > know the rules don't allow it.  I run a 1993 Mr2 Turbo in EM because
> > > I turned the boost up.  It has crappy street tires that give me no 
>traction
> > > and I run behind a couple ASP folks on race tires....I could run ASP
> > > locally - but I don't.
> > >
> > > My dedicated autocrosser is a 1986 MR2.  It's a CSP car, and it will
> > > always be a CSP car.  I'm building the engine, and the rulebook is
> > > going to the machine shop with me.  If it's not in the rulebook, it won't
> > > be done.  I was going to put a 7 rib 4A-GZE block in it for the stronger
> > > block and bottom end.  It wouldn't have given me a performance
> > > advantage and would probably have added some weight to the car....
> > > but I decided not to because I'D know that it wasn't legal.
> > >
> > > My point?  I don't see it as weenie/bickering/petty if someone calls you
> > > on an illegal mod.  The rulebook is there for everyone, and for some of
> > > us, the sport is a lot less fun when we see blatant disregard for it.  An
> > > STS competitor last month pointed out that someone in the class was
> > > on Nitto Drag radials (treadwear of 120 or so) and asked that he run in
> > > the proper class.  The Dragger got all bent out of shape and sulked for
> > > the rest of the event.....should we feel that the Dragger is the one to be
> > > pitied?  Technically....he was cheating.  He had no right to be in that
> > > class
> > > and he was sapping some of the enjoyment for the other people in his
> > > class.
> > >
> > > Wow....it looks like I'm trying to make up for my lack of posting in one
> > > fell
> > > swoop...
> > >
> > > David 'unemployed and suddenly verbos' Hawkins
> > > 86 MR2 CSP w/rod knock
> > > 93 Mr2 Turbo EM
> > > 86 Cressida EM
> > > 86 Cressida HS
> >
> > --
> > John Galligan
> > galligan@gulftel.com
> > SCCA-Gulf Coast Region
> > Cavalier Z24

-- 
Chris "Maverick" Shepard - Bailey, Colorado
SCCA Solo II Class FP '83 RX-7 (junker)
*and* Class SS '86 Vette (screamer)
Believe it or not, the little Mazda is actually more fun!

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>