ba-autox
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Round 6 results are posted

To: bay_area_autocross_list <ba-autox@autox.team.net>
Subject: Re: Round 6 results are posted
From: Ms Katie Kelly <aceontour@yahoo.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 13:13:54 -0800 (PST)
What I find interesting is that a lot of the cars
running in DM locally are illegal according to the
existing rules. We've got a Lotus 7 clone, a Fiat
clone, and then this car with its engine in the
passenger seat. Ironically, these types of cars are
the hot topic on the D-Mod/E-Mod discussion boards,
and they're trying to come up with a clarification to
keep DM a pure production car class, no clones
allowed. Yet it's the clones that would appear to be
bringing in the new blood.



--- Jerry Mouton <jerry@moutons.org> wrote:
> Pat,
> 
> All I'm saying is that the new classes seem to be
> a lot of fun for their competitors, and the old
> Mod-Prep-SP hierarchy is sort of whithering
> on the vine here, in terms of absoulte numbers.
> National wanted to bring in classes that were more
> fun and inline with what people want.  Seems to be
> working.
> 
> John argued that the classes grew because
> of people escaping faster drivers in the old classes
> --
> you don't run to classes averaging 12 entrants if
> you
> are that interested in trophies!
> 
> Nobody wants too many classes, but maybe the
> new Street classes are not the ones that should be
> pared off!
> 
> Maybe there's more to Solo2 than a
> cheap stepping stone to SCCA
> racing, as that's kind of what the old categories
> imply.
> 
> Or not!
> 
> Jerry
> 
> Jerry Mouton                              "Laissez
> les bons temps rouler!"
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Pat Kelly" <lollipop487@attbi.com>
> To: "Jerry Mouton" <jerry@moutons.org>;
> "bay_area_autocross_list"
> <ba-autox@autox.team.net>
> Sent: Tuesday, December 10, 2002 11:24 AM
> Subject: Re: Round 6 results are posted
> 
> 
> > I'm sorry your post was to the whole group...its
> vehemence (sp?) was
> > surprising.
> >     Avoiding faster drivers wasn't my point (it
> might have been John's),
> but
> > I did finish with saying it is a generational
> (era) deal; new classes are
> > built to attract new generations of drivers/cars.
> I finished by saying
> that
> > I'll bet in 10 years or so, another set of classes
> will be added to
> > accommodate the new drivers who don't want to
> build their cars for the
> > already existing classes. Ergo, a new class for
> ME! Basically everyone
> wants
> > to run without doing more to their own car than
> what they've already done,
> > and don't respond to the challenge of really
> getting out the rulebook to
> see
> > what they CAN do.
> >     For most the sport is too casual to get that
> serious. :)
> >     OTH, we did see a 'no holds barred' car show
> up in DM this last
> weekend.
> > The guy hasn't read the rulebook, for sure, with
> that wing. It's an AMod
> > car, not DMod. There are some who do like to build
> a car from scratch...or
> > modify their car far beyond what the manufacturer
> ever thought of.
> >     None of my remarks were meant as slams on the
> new folks, they were
> > observations after watching the sport develop and
> change over the past 40
> > years. I hate to admit to that autocross life
> span. :(
> > --Pat Kelly
> >
> > ----------
> > >From: "Jerry Mouton" <jerry@moutons.org>
> > >To: "Pat Kelly" <lollipop487@attbi.com>,
> "Bay_Area_Autocross_List"
> > <ba-autox@autox.team.net>
> > >Subject: Re: Round 6 results are posted
> > >Date: Tue, Dec 10, 2002, 11:14 AM
> > >
> >
> > > Gee, Pat,
> > >
> > > I don't see it.  I don't see any people who
> moved to
> > > Street classes to avoid faster drivers.  Vic and
> Durk
> > > for two don't take second place to anybody
> driving, or Charlie
> > > Davis, among trophy winners (don't mean to
> slight anybody
> > > I didn't mention -- I just don't remember
> everybody).
> > > Or Katie, or Reitmeir, or Richardson, or Don
> Ebaugh,
> > > Corey, or Navid, or Jim Ochi, ...  Moving to
> avoid faster drivers
> > > didn't seem to work too good, huh? ; -)
> > >
> > > True or not, people see Modified as not for
> "cars like this",
> > > street cars with popular mods; it's for gonzo
> no-holds-barred
> > > aluminum formula cars or specials.  That's why
> you didn't see
> > > all these SM or even OSP cars moving from Mod. 
> Almost
> > > nobody runs Mod.
> > >
> > > These folks moved from Stock  or SP to SM (for
> example)
> > > because they could make mods they wanted to
> their cars.
> > >
> > > I think if "grasshopper thinking" had not
> prevailed and there
> > > were no "Street" classes, you would not be
> seeing growth
> > > in the Mod classes.  There sure wasn't any
> before these
> > > classes were introduced.  Rather, there has been
> continual
> > > decrease in SFR Mod, as far as I can see.
> > >
> > > Jerry
> > >
> > > Jerry Mouton                             
> "Laissez les bons temps
> rouler!"
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Pat Kelly" <lollipop487@attbi.com>
> > > To: "Ian Green" <iagreen@ucdavis.edu>;
> "Bay_Area_Autocross_List"
> > > <ba-autox@autox.team.net>
> > > Sent: Tuesday, December 10, 2002 10:26 AM
> > > Subject: Re: Round 6 results are posted
> > >
> > >
> > >>     From my point of view, grasshopper (age
> does have its
> priviledges!),
> > >> John is correct, and I agree he said it too
> bluntly.
> > >>     The real question is, would these folks
> have run if there were none
> of
> > >> these new classes? Probably the answer is
> no...because:
> > >> 1. They'd have to put their classes back to
> stock or
> > >> 2. They'd be uncompetitive with SP because they
> don't want to go that
> far
> > >> (I'm referring to STS)
> > >>     However, SM and SM2 allow more than SP, and
> many of those cars
> could
> > > run
> > >> in a Modified class. :) In fact, they allow
> more than Prepared in some
> > > ways.
> > >>     As these new classes develop (it'll take
> about 10 years), another
> > > layer
> > >> of classes will be proposed and accepted
> because there will be a
> perceived
> > >> need to "fit the era," just as the STS, SM2,
> SM, and STX have fit for
> this
> > >> era, and just as SP was developed about 20
> years ago on top of the then
> > >> existing Stock, Prepared, and Modified classes.
> > >>     Maybe it all revolves around "I want a
> class for ME!" :)
> > >>     Whether new classes 'good' or 'bad,' I
> don't think anyone can say.
> But
> > >> their development certainly keeps the sport, my
> favorite, alive. And
> > > that's
> > >> a good thing. :)
> > >> --Pat Kelly
> > >>
> > >> ----------
> > >> >From: "Ian Green" <iagreen@ucdavis.edu>
> > >> >To: "Bay_Area_Autocross_List"
> <ba-autox@autox.team.net>
> > >> >Subject: RE: Round 6 results are posted
> 
=== message truncated ===

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